Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
When we look at the world around us and see a billion neighbors in poverty. Consider some of these statistics: thirty
thousand children die a day of hunger and preventable diseases; thirteen million people die every year from infectious and
parasitic diseases we know how to prevent; in 2002 37% of the people in low-income countries1 over the age of fifteen could
not read (in Burkina Faso it was 82%); 1.2 billion live in almost absolute poverty trying to survive on a dollar or less a day,
and another 1.6 billion people are very poor attempting to live on two dollars or less a day.2 Added to this fact of global
poverty is the fact that Western nations are much richer. Consider these statistics concerning the per capita GNP in 2003:
Switzerland was $39,880, the United States was $37,610, while India was $530 and Ethiopia was $90.3
Why does this situation exist? What are the causes of poverty? Is it because of laziness, or oppressive governments,
or the wrong type of aid from the Western nations, or subsidized farming, or Western corporations, or the materialistic
tendencies of the West, or Capitalism itself? What is the best way to alleviate poverty? What should our response as
Christians be? Is the solution increased government aid both at home and abroad, or less government involvement, or is it the
job of the church? What would economic justice look like in the real world?4
The topics of wealth, poverty, and economics are complex and there are divergent perspectives on these issues in the
First, when applying the Bible to ethical decisions there are hermenutical issues involved because of the following:
issues addressed in Scripture are not always identical to today, moving from the Old Testament to the New Testament, the
relationship between the particularity of the text and its universality, and the handling of complex issues with multiple
Second, one’s worldview and one’s approach to ethics effects the way one views these issues (whether teleological in
the consequentialist ethic of ethical egoism or utilitarnism, or deontological in the principle ethics of those who emphasize
reason on the one hand and those who emphasize scripture on the other).6
Third, when we approach this issue, we are dealing with judgments about the facts or empirical realities surrounding
wealth, poverty, and economics. A) Often our differences have to do with differing accounts of the situation at hand. We
sometimes accept certain positions based on a selection of the facts, which greatly influences our final position. B) We often
interpret the data differently. C) Our impressions of the situation play a significant role in our moral decisions.7
1
Fourth, within the Christian tradition there are different motifs for making decisions: the deliberative motif (reason is
seen as a supplement or synonymous in the task of making ethical decisions), the prescriptive motif (which looks to explicit
rules, principles, or moral actions from Scripture in making ethical decisions), and the relational motif (ethical decisions are
Fifth, we are fallen (even our thinking is affected by the fall9) and finite. Because of this, we are not completely
objective.10 We are often influenced by social mores, ideologies, and vested interest.11 This makes our work harder as people
We will explore and evaluate different economic systems that Christians have proposed and evaluate whether they
are compelling biblically, theologically, rationally, and whether they promote justice and elevate poverty. I will then argue
for my position, that of a guided market system of economics, and conclude with the way that the church can address the
issue today as the church and also in the wider culture at large.
I. Arguments
For many, capitalism is a sort of economic swearword. It is associated with greed, exploitation, and self-interest.
Images like these often come to mind: greedy executives associated with corporations such as Enron, the financial crisis of
2008-9, oil companies that wreak havoc on the environment, sweat shops in China, wasted resources, and ugly advertising. It
is often blamed for every social problem. Here is how one person put it: “‘The history of capitalism is a history of slavery,
child labor, war, and environmental pollution.’”12 Is this really the case? Is capitalism merely about self-interest? Ann Rand,
the Russian born novelist and philosopher espoused the consequentialist ethic of ethical egoism. She took Adam Smith’s
philosophy to the extreme. She called greed a virtue because it is the foundation of a free economy, and she saw Christian
2
Christians often confuse a caricature of capitalism with the real thing and often ignore basic facts about economics.
Rich Karlgaard, the Christian publisher of Forbes magazine, has complained that listening to a priest or a pastor speak on this
topic “‘is like hearing a eunuch lecture on sex: He may have studied the topic but really knows little about the mechanics.’”14
Christian capitalists argue that it aligns nicely with a Christian worldview. For a capitalist system to flourish the
market economy needs not only competition, but also rule of law and virtues like self-sacrifice, a commitment to delayed
gratification, stable families, cooperation, and a willingness to risk based on a future hope.15 Contrary to popular opinion,
What is a market economy? Ron Sider explains: “[it] is an economic arrangement in which the bulk of the wealth
and means of production are privately owned and most wages and prices are set by supply and demand.”16 Although the key
ingredients are competition, private property, and the pursuit of rational self-interest,17 the main reason why market
economies work is because they allow wealth to be created: “[w]ealth is created when our creative freedom is allowed to
prosper in a free-market environment undergirded by the rule of law and suffused with a rich moral culture.”18 This creativity
is a reflection of the fact that we are made in the image of a creative God, the imago dei,19 and responsible wealth creation is
Capitalism utilizes utilitarian arguments in its approach. It affirms that it is the best system available to us.
Everywhere capitalism has gone, poverty has decreased. An example of this is Hong Kong, which was a British Colony from
1842 to 1997.21 It started as a fishing village and now is an economic superpower. This is not unique to Hong Kong; it has
been replicated throughout Asia. Ron Sider states: “expanding market economies have significantly reduced poverty in
Asia.”22
Capitalism affirms low taxes because to charge high taxes to the rich to feed the poor is stealing. It is not the job of
the government to redistribute wealth from one citizen to another and is different from general taxation of legitimate
government functions. It is to take voluntary generosity out of the picture (2 Cor. 9:7). In fact, welfare often has the
opposite effect. It is degrading to the recipients and creates addictive dependency. Welfare is a disincentive to work.23 In
the United States, for example, “[w]hen job programs began their massive expansion, the black youth unemployment rate
began to rise. Between the years 1951 and 1980, black twenty- to twenty-four-year-olds experienced a 19 percent increase in
Market capitalism is against some noble ideals. It is against a “living wage” (minimum wage) because it is a form of
price fixing that tries to distribute wealth before it’s been created; it argues that it actually leads to unemployment and less
3
entry-level jobs into the workforce because employers can not just afford something because the government changes a law
(e.g. in France where there are high minimum wages they have higher unemployment than places like the US with low
minimum wages). It is against “fair trade” because it is only because of the artificially high prices that farmers become or
remain part of the coffee market, even though it may not help them in the long run.25 It is against “aid” that rich countries
give to foreign poor countries. The United States overproduction of a crop, like cotton, is dumped on a poor country like
Senegal. The problem is that it suppresses the farming of that crop in these poor countries. It would be better if the United
States kept their crops and allowed the poor countries to compete fairly in a free world market. Government to government
aid (like the 1% increase that Bono’s ONE Campaign advocates) often is wasted or used to sustain crooked dictators who
There are several myths concerning capitalism.27 Two of them, the zero-sum game myth and the usury myth are
II. Critique
First, even though market capitalism has increased wealth around the world, at least a quarter of the world’s
population lack the capital to participate in any major way in the global economy. In agricultural societies, land remains the
basic form of capital. Money and education are far more vital in modern capital-intensive, knowledge-intensive economies.
Approximately a quarter of the world population have virtually no land, very little money, and almost no education.29 The
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) confirms this fact: “‘Although global integration is a powerful force in
reducing poverty, 2 billion people are in danger of becoming marginal to the world economy.’”30 Therefore, market
capitalism does not take into account egalitarian justice (in terms of equal access) and too much emphasizes a merit form of
Second, insidious cultural decline appears to follow the expansion of the market. Materialism, consumerism,
individualism, and pollution increase with the market economy. A focus on making money becomes more important than
God, neighbor, marriage, and parenting. Materialistic consumerism is fueled by advertising techniques to persuade us that
joy and happiness come through material things. Television is highly influential in this regard. For example, in Brazil
desperately poor woman will forgo buying clothes and shoes to purchase Avon’s “Anew” skin cream that costs thirty dollars
a jar.32 The market corrupts culture by rewarding depraved conduct. For example, if there is a demand for pornography or
4
dishonest advertisements, the market bountifully recompenses the makers to the corruption of the character of both the
consumer and the producer. There is also a tendency for the market to dominate all of life. For example, people can be
viewed as products (e.g. in the choice of a spouse, nannies can be hired to so as to “save” valuable time, etc.). The market
also compensates those who choose pollution and quick profits over slower profits combined with environmental
responsibility.33
Third, taxes cannot be considered stealing. We choose representative government and the reason the tax system
exists is because we support it. It is not stealing (cf. Romans 13:1-2, 6-7).34
Fourth, it fails to apply biblical principles such as justice (e.g. fair wages in James 5:4) and mercy (Micah 6:8). As
Ron Sider says “It is false to think that a market economy, if freed from all government interference, would create what the
I. Argument
This position argues for a moderated capitalism. The guided-market system seeks a balance of three Biblical
principles: freedom, justice, and responsibility, that market capitalism lacks. Freedom was the vision of the Jubilee year
(Lev. 25:8-55), freedom from economic and social captivity. Individual and corporate justice was the call of the prophets
(Mic. 6:8; Amos 5:24) and Jesus himself (Mt 23:23). Responsibility is a call to be faithful stewards of what God has
entrusted to us. We are to care for his creation, provide justice, and bring liberty to those he has made.36
Freedom and justice in the economic system means that at the one end, the powerful are not permitted to exploit the
powerless (e.g. the American economy supported the institution of slavery, and then eventually child labor) and thus, limit
justice, and at the other end, it is not to be so tightly controlled that it commands what will be produced and who will receive
it and, thus, limit freedom. For an economic system to be just, all people’s best interests in society must be considered.
Adjustments must be made to give equal opportunity to people with physical handicaps and barriers such as sex, race,
religion, age, and ethnicity must be removed. Access to an excellent education should belong to every person (egalitarian
justice) and inequalities must not be passed on to the next generation of innocent children born into institutional poverty
(need justice).37
5
Responsibility in the economic system stipulates that both freedom and justice be combined to bring the most benefit
possible to society. When justice has been missing, income, education, health care, shelter must be provided charitably by
society. However, charity must not replace justice. Charity can rob people of human dignity. Justice means that we must
work towards a system that reduces the necessity of charity. In fact, private organizations could be hired to replace the state
in terms of welfare services. With more organizations competing for business, money would be used more efficiently. This
II. Critique
First, a free market response would say that this position looks too much to the state for justice. The church and the
people of society as a whole should take care of those in need. Only in the last resort should the state be involved.39 Jay
Richards advocates what he calls the principle of subsidiarity. A centralized government knows less about individual
problems than those who are closer to the problem. Therefore, the people with the most knowledge have the most
Second, a centralist response would counter the negative understanding of welfare and see it as the means by which
the whole community accepts responsibility for basic and crisis needs. The welfare state exists so that no one has to be
anxious about his or her health (e.g. free health care provided in Canada and the United Kingdom), homelessness, old age,
Decentralist Economics
I. Argument
This approach looks to the early church in Acts 2 as its model. Reflecting the Anabaptist movement and the Christ
against culture position,42 it does not believe that we should settle for a lowest common denominator approach to economics,
because few issues are amoral; everything should be under the lordship of Christ including economics. The church as a
called out people is to be a counter-cultural transformed community of love and sharing, a community that points to the future
kingdom. Therefore, we should expect to see transformed economic relationships among the people of God. Spiritual
6
renewal will have economic results.43 In the Old Testament, God’s people were to be stewards, and not owners of private
property (Lev 25:23), they were to practice economic equality and social justice (e.g. after the Hebrew people entered
Canaan, they distributed the land equally; each person had the same size plot of land and a similar size of house), they were
not to charge any interest (Ex 22:25; Deut 23:19-20; Lev 25:35-38), and the land was to be redistributed (Lev 25) every
fiftieth year in the year of Jubilee. The early church built on this foundation and the teachings of Jesus about money, the
poor, and the kingdom (Lk. 6:20, 30; 12:32-34; 16:13; 18:24-25; Mt. 5:42; 6:19; 10:21, 23-31), and shared everything equally
among each other. The Old Testament Jubilee was fulfilled in the early church. There was no private property and everyone
was the no part of the same socio-economic class (Gal 3:28). The people of God are called to Christian community,
koinonia, which means to hold things in common. It means community, fellowship, partnership, and communion. Koinonia
Applying this to economics today, it is against capitalism because of the increasing concentration of wealth in the
hands of a few, its exploitation of third world farmers for luxury products that they cannot afford, its focus on self-interest, its
lending of money at interest to third countries that cannot afford to repay, and its hoarding of resources (e.g. although only 5
percent of the world’s population, the United States consumes two thirds of the world’s resources).45 For social change to
happen, the church needs to simplify its living and follow the Biblical vision of koinonia and jubilee.46
II. Critique
This view, although compelling has some problems. First, in Acts 2 we read these well known verses concerning the
early church: “And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and
belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need” (vv. 44-45). Many Christians have read Acts through the
lense of Marx.47 As biblical scholarship has shown, although the early church was generous with one another, but many did
own property,48 any form of communism was voluntary,49 the state was not involved,50 and different socio-economic classes
Second, it two easily perpetuates economic myths about capitalism. For example, the zero-sum game myth
(believing that trade requires a winner and a loser), the materialist myth (believing that wealth isn’t created, it’s simply
transferred), the greed myth (believing that the essence of capitalism is greed), the usury myth, and the freeze-frame myth
7
(believing that things will always stay the same in terms of population trends and that our current “natural resource” will
always be needed).52
Centralist Economics
I. Argument
This position affirms a Christ the transformer of culture position in that it affirms that a centralized governmental
solution as the key to the relief of our distressed neighbor. It affirms the goodness of the state (Rom. 13:1-10) and like any
human institution (e.g. marriage, family, work, and social life) just because it is prone to corruption by human disobedience,
does not overturn God’s purposes for it. In the Old Testament the free market was not left to its own (i.e. the year of Jubliee),
and there were certain relief provisions and structures in place to prevent injustice. Modern liberal democracies are larger
than they used to be because of the complexity of the world in which we live. We need a large state to maintain the style of
life we have at present. The vast majority of the poor are born into it and it is not the result of personal incompetence.
Poverty is caused because of the failure of modern social institutions to meet their obligations. The rich feed off the poor, not
because of personal insensitivity, but because we jointly bound in a societal structure that works this way. Therefore, because
the problems of the economy are structural we need the participation of a central, democratically governed management.
Through taxation, this central government would take care of the unemployed, the sick, the elderly, and the homeless; it
would provide legal protection for the poor against the abuse of the rich, and it would redistribute the wealth of society to
those in need of housing, education, and jobs. Only the government can bring about this kind of structural change.
Therefore, we need Christians involved in political pressure groups to convince governments that they have the critical
II. Critique
First, this position seems to baptize a liberal approach to economics and poverty, rather than seriously engage with
the Scriptures. Second, concentrating power in the hands of a few can actually destroy freedom and create tyranny. As a
theocracy, Israel was an exception to this form of civil government.54 Third, this position seems to believe that centrally
8
controlled systems are more impervious to corruption than free societies (Rev. 13 views Babylon as a beast). Fourth, the
Scriptures hold responsible the individual for the plight of the poor. This position can abdicate people of their personal
responsibility because they can blame the government.55 Fifth, this view lacks a vision for the kingdom of God in the world.
My Position
The guided-market system is the best economic system available to us if it is combined with a biblical understanding
of economic life (see end notes)57 and possessions (see Appendix 1 for a summary of the Bible’s teaching). It allows for
capitalism to flourish and create wealth (freedom), it has checks and balances in terms of justice (capitalism is held
accountable), and it holds us responsible for those in society. This position affirms biblical themes such as fair wages (James
5:4), which free market capitalism explains away, redress for past wrongs so that people can overcome inequalities of the past
(need justice; e.g. the Year of Jubilee in Lev. 25; the Bible could be seen in support of affirmative action because in Mt. 20:1-
16 God gives grace to the neediest rather than judging strictly according to merit),58 as well justice in the present in terms of
equal access to jobs, rights, housing, and pay (egalitarian justice).59 It does not seek to keep people dependent on the welfare
system as the centralist economic approach does, but seeks to educate and equip people so that they are able to enter the work
force and earn a living for themselves It sees the primary responsibility of justice and care for the poor to be in the hands of
the church (a very biblical theme), but there are still state held safety nets to catch those that the church and society misses.
Because capitalism is still affirmed, the poor have opportunity to gain dignity through work and reflect more fully the
working God who made them (although initial help may be needed in terms of microloans, and free training).
Our ethics related to poverty and wealth must have the following features. 1. The Triune God is the foundation for
ethics. Because God was rich and generous God towards us in Christ (2 Cor. 8:9), we also should be generous to others (God
as the ground of Christian ethics). Because God pours out mercy on the righteous and the unrighteous we should practice
justice to the both unbeliever and believer (God as the norm of Christian ethics). Because our hearts naturally covet idols, we
will need God’s strength and the empowerment of his Spirit to enable our will to live joyfully in submission to God’s will
(God as the power for Christian ethics).60 2. Ethics are rooted in the Christian worldview (creation, fall, redemption, and
consummation). For example, we must not downplay work or people (the goodness of creation), we must be aware of self-
deception and the way we justify things such as greed (the reality of the fall), we must affirm that even though the kingdom is
9
to come there is much good that can be done in the present in terms of justice and the bringing of shalom (redemption), and
we must not put our hope in utopia schemes and an overrealized eschatology, but wait patiently for complete justice at the
end of the age (consummation).61 3. Virtue Ethics are important. The heart is very important in this issue. The moral life is
not only what we do, but who we are. We need to be people who display the character of Christ and display the virtues of the
Holy Spirit such as love, kindness, and generosity (Gal 5:22-23).62 4. Principles are important. Once we understand to the
best of our ability the Bible in its historical and literary context, we will seek to apply the Bible specifically to our lives.63
Only the gospel can change us, motivate us, and free us to live out the biblical vision of generosity. Money is a gift
from God, but it is tempting to make this good thing into an ultimate thing.64 Colossians 3:5 says “greed is idolatry” and
Ephesians 5:5 says “the greedy person is an idolater.” Money and possessions can easily take the place of love for and
devotion to God, trust in God, and service and obedience to God. The Puritan David Clarkson (1621-1686) gives good
advice on being free from soul idolatry: “(1) ‘Get new natures….Cry unto God for the spirit of regeneration’; (2) ‘Mortify
your lusts’ (cf. Col. 3:5); (3) ‘Get right apprehensions of the things of this world. An overvaluing of outward things is the
birth and food of soul idolatry’; and (4) ‘Let your hearts be especially jealous of lawful comforts [pleasures which are
permitted]; these are the most dangerous snares.’”65 May we echo this Latin American prayer: “O God, to those who have
hunger give bread; and to those who have bread the hunger for justice.”66
The church is called to be salt, light, and leaven. We are called by God to be active in every sphere of society as
God’s faithful presence. We are not to be against the world and write off capitalism all together (Christ Against Culture
position), or become like the culture and have little to no prophetic voice in terms of injustice (Christ of Culture position), or
to even to legislate Biblical laws (the Christ the Transformer of Culture position). We are to be an influence for the good
wherever God has placed us providentially.67 We should focus on being the church and practicing justice and generosity as
the church, but we should not privatize our faith. We should speak out against injustice and fight for human rights, but we
must learn the limits of political action. Without seeking, in our pluralistic society, a theocratic or constantinian approach to
resolve the issues of poverty and injustice (e.g. the Christendom Group in the mid-twentieth century or the theonomy or
reconstructionist group represented by Rushdoony and Bahnsen), we can use a natural law approach by appealing to rational
arguments and examples from history to influence people and even public policy. If placed in positions of authority, we can
10
work toward just laws. However, the main way that we will address this issue is by applying the Biblical vision to our own
The following are some applications to contemporary Christian living. First, we should educate the church on the
actual needs of the world and our biblical responsibility of stewardship. This could come in the form of sermons, book
studies, a seminary class on the topic, etc. Second, pastorally, we must have specific ways that we minister to the poor and
downtrodden through our local churches both for immediate emergency needs and longer term solutions of the poor (e.g.
food banks, educational scholarships, counseling, and life skills training). Third, we should give possessions generously as a
means to be freed from the temptation to overvalue it. Fourth, we could practice a graduated tithe as a way of applying the
biblical principle of proportionality in 1 Corinthians 16:2.69 Fifth, we should support organizations that are faithful to the
gospel and care for the poor in ways that are empowering (like those who organizations that give micro enterprise loans to the
poor).70 Seventh, we should seek to live a simpler lifestyle. As one person put it, we are to “live simply so that others can
simply live.” May God give us wisdom and enable us to obey his call to care for the poor in His world. For Christ’s glory,
Amen!
11
Appendix 1: The Biblical View of Possessions
The Biblical view of possessions can be summed up with this golden mean: “neither poverty nor riches” (Proverbs
30:8). In the Old Testament economy certain things were instituted to prevent extremes of riches and poverty from
remaining. For example, each person was to own their own property and piece of land, taxes and tithes were instituted, and
biblical commands encouraged voluntary generosity. The land and its produce was seen as good. Only when it is used for
personal ends rather than helping and protecting those in trouble was it seen negatively. The principle of Jubilee in Leviticus
25:23 reinforced this idea.71 The prophets evaluated the Israelites by how well they took care of the poor and powerless: the
fatherless, the widow, and the alien: “[t]hose in positions of power have no increased privilege, only increased
Jesus teaches extensively on possessions and wealth. He affirms the use of wealth for various kinds of celebrations
(e.g. he accepts invitations to dinner hosted by well-to-do leaders; Mark 2:15-17; Luke 11:37; 14:1-24; 19:5-9; and he refuses
to rebuke the woman for lavishly pouring expensive perfume on him), he speaks of the potential deceitfulness of wealth
material possessions as a an obstacle to true discipleship and the fact that it can keep people out of the kingdom (Mark 4:18-
19), he says that we must be willing to give up wealth as his disciples if circumstances demand it (Mt. 13:44-46), he teaches
that we should not accumulate unused surplus goods, property, or investments without any thought for the needy of the world
(Lk. 12:16-21), he says that we should invite the outcasts into our midst and our homes (Lk. 14:12-24), he teaches that all of
our time, talents, and treasures are to be used for kingdom purposes (Lk. 19:11-27; Mt. 25:14-30), he teaches that charity for
the poor is an expression of what is inside (Lk. 11:41-42; Mt. 23:23), he stresses that those who seek to save their physical
lives at the expense of their spiritual well-being will ultimately lose both (Mark 8:36), he teaches that personal greed can
masquerade as altruism (Mark 14:3-9), he affirms the giving of taxes (Mark 12:13-17), and lastly he teaches that it is the
percentage or amount of sacrifice that counts in God’s eyes, not the net amount (Mark 12:41-44). Some principles can be
gleaned from Jesus’ teaching. When believers realize that God will care for them through others in the church if they
unexpectedly find themselves impoverished, they can be freed to give more generously they have much. Although one can
be rich and be a Christian, he clearly teaches that there are extremes of riches and poverty that are intolerable in the circle of
his followers.73
In the early church the middle class and the upper class developed as the gospel spread into more wealthy Greco-
Roman circles (see endnotes). However, in Acts there is a real concern for the poor and a commitment to reduce the gap
12
between the wealthy and the poor in their congregations (Acts 4:32-5:11): “There were no needy persons among them” (Acts
4:34a). In the book of James, he teaches the transience of earthly riches and earthly life in general and that wealthy believers
are not to boast in their earthly possessions, but in their spiritual dependence on God (James 1:9-11), that holiness and social
concern belong together (James 1:27), that we are not to show favoritism to the wealthy (James 2:1-7), that professions of
faith are empty if they are not informed by deeds to the vulnerable and poor (James 2:14-17), that we are not to plan so well
that we become self-sufficient and leave no room for God (James 4:1-3, 13-17), and that we are to pay fair wages, live
simply, and not to oppress or kill the poor in pursuit of riches (James 5:1-6).74
Paul speaks much on possessions. In Galatians he is eager to remember the poor. In 1 and 2 Thessalonians he tells
them not to be idle and not to depend solely on others. In Corinth the wealthy expect the same treatment that they did when
pagans (1 Corinthians), but God calls them to give generously like the less wealth off have done to meet the needs of the poor
in Jerusalem (2 Corinthians); they and others eventually give generously (Romans). Christian freedom should result in
liberty in relationships and structures of accountability (Philemon and Ephesians). Christian workers should be thankful for
support from other believers but not depend on it (Philippians). Lastly, Christians with wealth should be aware of its
seduction and avoid this trap by giving generous amounts of it away (Pastoral Epistles).75
1
The per capita Gross National Income, GNI, is $735 or less. Ronald J. Sider, Rich Christians in An Age of Hunger (Nashville, TN:
Thomas Nelson, 2005), 4-5.
2
Ibid., 2-3.
3
If we as Westerners were to adopt the lifestyle of the 1.2 billion, we would have to abandon the following “luxuries”:
We begin by invading the house of our imaginary American family to strip it of its furniture. Everything goes: beds, chairs,
tables, television set, lamps. We will leave the family with a few old blankets, a kitchen table, a wooden chair. Along with the
bureaus go the clothes. Each member of the family may keep in his “wardrobe” his oldest suit, a shirt or blouse. We will permit
a pair of shoes for the family, but none for the wife or children.
We move to the kitchen. The appliances have already been taken out, so we turn to the cupboards…The box of matches may
stay, a small bag of flour, some sugar, and salt. A few moldy potatoes, already in the garbage can, must be hastily rescued, for
they will provide much of tonight’s meal. We will leave a handful of onions, and a dish of dried beans. All the rest we take
away: the meat, the fresh vegetables, the canned goods, the crackers, the candy.
Now we have stripped the house: the bathroom has been dismantled, the running water shut off, the electric wires taken out.
Next we take away the house. The family can move to the toolshed…
Now government services must go. No more postman, no more firemen. There is a school, but it is three miles away and
consists of two classrooms…There are, of course, no hospitals or doctors nearby. The nearest clinic is ten miles away and is
tended by a midwife. It can be reached by bicycle, provided that the family has a bicycle, which is unlikely…
Finally, money. We will allow our family a cash hoard of $5.00. This will prevent our breadwinner from experiencing the
tragedy of an Iranian peasant who went blind because he could not raise the $3.94, which he mistakenly thought he needed to
receive admission to a hospital where he could have been cured (taken from Sider, 1-2).
4
Dennis Hollinger, Choosing the Good: Christian Ethics in a Complex World (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002), 179.
5
Ibid., 153-62.
6
Ibid., 27-44.
7
Ibid., 175.
8
Ibid., 128-148.
9
Alvin Plantinga, “Sin and its Cognitive Consequences” in Warranted Christian Belief (New York: Oxford, 2000), 199-240.
10
Hollinger, Choosing the Good, 175.
13
11
First, we are influenced by social mores, nonrational traditions, passed on from generation to generation that convey a sense of
oughtness, are merely accepted, not easily changed, and are not to be challenged because they are always right and maintain the status
quo. For example, if one’s cultural mores include freedom, individualism, and hard work, that person’s empirical judgment may see lack
of personal responsibility as the cause of poverty and personal responsibility as the cure to poverty.
Second, Ideologies also affect which facts we accept and how we interpret them. An ideology “‘…presents a picture of the word that
gives legitimacy to the cultural values and goals it holds most dear. While its focus is on social-empirical reality…it colors one’s
understanding of every aspect of life.’” Ideologies deviate from scientific objectivity because they are trying to twist the truth towards a
specific goal. They do this by selecting the issues to be dealt with (i.e. are often oriented towards one issue and interpret all of reality
through that issue), and by distorting the problems and the issues treated. It reveals a world that is too simplistic and does not take into
account ambiguity and complexity. A good example is Marxism, which reduces all social problems to economic realities, the class
conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.
Third, vested interests can influence ideological commitments. This can be defined by the benefits that one receives from an existing
arrangement in society or within an institution. An example of this would be when a person votes for a certain political candidate because
they will benefit them the most financially (i.e. through lower taxes).
Fourth, our perception of reality is also influenced by disposition, personalities, or temperament. Some people have a conformist style
while others have a challenging style. Some people are by nature conservative and others are radical [Hollinger, 175, 179-185].
12
Quoted in Ibid., 1.
13
Jay W. Richards, Money, Greed, and God (New York: HarperOne, 2009), 2; Rand said the following: “‘The first right on earth is the
right of the ego. Man’s first duty is to himself. His moral law is never to place his prime goal with the persons of others. His moral
obligation is to do what he wishes, provided his wish does not depend upon other men.” For the New Intellectual (New York: Signet,
1961), 82 quoted in Hollinger, Choosing the Good, 30.
14
Quote from Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 5.
15
Ibid., 7.
16
Sider 135.
17
“The Bible nowhere condemns self-interest – rather, it calls individuals to balance their self-interest with the interests of others (Phil.
2:4)” [Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 339.]
18
Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 8.
19
Ibid.
20
Rae, 336.
21
Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 157.
22
Sider, 17.
23
Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 55.
24
Ibid., 48.
25
Markets change like the weather and when “fair trade” prices rise with inflation and people stop buying, the future livelihood of the
farmers is at stake because they will not have time to adjust and reallocate scares resources like time, land, and labor to more valued uses
like they would have if they experienced the market as it actually is in reality (Richards, 41-42).
26
Ibid., 39-45.
27
Ibid.
28
The Zero-Sum Game Myth
This position characterizes competition as a sort of Darwinian “survival of the fittest.” It is the belief that to have a winner one
must have a loser. It is called the zero-sum game myth. This was largely so in the ancient world as the economy was mostly one of
agriculture with very little trade. Therefore, the pool of economic resources was relatively fixed, so that when one person became
wealthy, it was usually at the expense of someone else. However, today the zero-sum game view does not characterize the economy. In
modern industrial and information economies the economic pie is actually increasing (Rae, 331-332). Capitalism creates wealth.
Therefore, the rich are getting richer, but at the same time the poor can become stronger financially as well. Statistics bear this out as
well. At Gapminder.com one animation called “Gap Minder World, 2006” shows the trends in life expectancy and per capita income
from about 1974 to 2005. What one notices is that per capita income and life expectancy has gone up in many countries in the last thirty
years and total income has increased worldwide (Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 91).
14
trade began to expand. Because there was so much trade, coins became scarce, long distances made transporting large amounts of coins
risky, and counterfeit money increased. Out of necessity, banks emerged in different cities. Bills of exchange replaced coins. Eventually,
banks had more deposits on hand than they needed for their daily demands. Therefore, they started to lend capital loans, realizing that
these were different from usury. Calvin, the Reformers, and eventually Catholic scholars recognized this difference as well. Usury came
to be seen as unjustly charging someone for a loan by exploiting them when they are in a desperate situation, not the charging interest on a
loan to offset the risk of the loan and the cost of forgoing other uses for the money (Ibid., 140-144).
29
Sider, Rich Christians, 138.
30
Ibid. Ron Sider states the following: “The market’s mechanism of supply and demand is blind to the distinction between basic
necessities (even minimal food needed to avoid starvation) and luxuries desired by the wealthy. According to the United Nations
Development Programme, Human Development Report 2002, the richest 5 percent of the world’s people have incomes 114 times those of
the poorest 5 percent. Left to itself, a market economy will simply supply what the wealthy can pay for – even if poor folk starve” (Ibid).
31
Hollinger, 228.
32
Ibid., 141.
33
Ibid., 142-143.
34
William E. Diehl, “A Guided-Market Response” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 69-70.
35
Ibid., 143.
36
William E. Diehl, “A Guided-Market System” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 87-89.
37
Ibid., 90-91.
38
Ibid., 103.
39
Gary North, “A Free-Market Response” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 114-115.
40
Richards, 49-51.
41
John Gladwin, “A Centralist Response” in Wealth and Poverty, 125-126.
42
See H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and Culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1951).
43
Art Gish, “Decentralist Economics” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 132-133.
44
Ibid., 134-140.
45
Ibid., 141-151; statistics taken from Sider, Rich Christians, 31.
46
Art Gish, “Decentralist Economics” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 150-154.
47
Marx and Engels secularized this type of approach in their philosophy of communism in their book The Communist Manifesto (1848).
They stated that the original state of man was a primitive communism without private property. They argued that in modern capitalist
societies, the bourgeoisie seek above all else profits at the expense of the workers, continually investing in the businesses until they need
less and less workers, with the result being that the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. The consequence of this being that the workers
would revolt and then institute full communism. (Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 12). The problem is that communism never worked.
The dream turned into a nightmare. According to The Black Book of Communism (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), 4;
quoted in Ibid., 21.), 85 million to 100 million human beings lost their lives to this dark experiment. Here are the death tolls by
Communist regimes in the twentieth century (a rough tally): China, 65 million; U.S.S.R, 20 million; North Korea, 2 million; Cambodia, 2
million; Africa, 1.7 million; Afghanistan, 1.5 million; Vietnam, 1 million; Eastern Europe, 1 million; Latin America, 150,000;
International Communist movement, about 100,000.
48
Cf. the reference to the home of John Mark in Acts 12:12. Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5) were not judged because they did not give
everything they owned, but because they claimed to give all; “kept back” actually refers to a very specific and rare term, nosphizo,
meaning “to swindle” or “to embezzle”; this same term is in the Septuagint (LXX) in Joshua 7:1 in reference to Achan’s sin; Luke intends
us to see the parallel [Craig Blomberg, Neither Poverty nor Riches: A biblical theology of possessions (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity,
1999), 165-166].
49
Richards, Money, Greed, and God, 23. Cf. Martin Hengel, Property and Riches in the Early Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 32.
50
Ibid.
51
See the following examples: Deacons were required to govern both their children and their households well (1 Timothy 3:12). The
phrase kai ton idion indicates that household includes more than wives and children, in fact slaves (cf. 1 Timothy 6). Housing
accommodating more than a nuclear family would have been available only to the wealthy. 1 Timothy 2 indicates that there were wealthy
woman in the church. Reggie Kidd, Wealth and Beneficence in the Pastoral Epistles (Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1990), 83-86.
52
Richards, Money Greed and God.
53
John Gladwin, “Centralist Economics” in Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views of Economics, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1984), 181-197.
54
Gary North, “A Free-Market Response” in Wealth and Poverty, 200-202.
55
William Diehl, “A Guided-Market Response” in Wealth and Poverty, 206-207.
56
Gish, “A Decentralist Response,” in Wealth and Poverty, 218.
15
57
This includes the following primary principles: 1. Though tarnished by sin, the created world is intrinsically good because it is God’s
creation; 2. God is the ultimate owner of all of the world’s productive resources; 3. Human beings are stewards of these resources, charged
with their responsible and productive use; 4. Responsible wealth creation is part of the dominion mandate and a way of honoring God; 5.
Human beings are created with freedom and a need for community, making them more than autonomous economic agents; 6. Work is
inherently good, though marred by sin; 7. Human beings who are capable of working are responsible for supporting themselves and their
families; 8. The community is responsible for taking care of the poor – those who cannot support themselves; 9. Human beings are not to
exploit the economically vulnerable, but to take care of them; 10. Economic justice is the provision of access to the productive resources
necessary for self-support; 11. Distributive justice in the Bible is based on a combination of merit and need (For an expansion of these
points by Scott B. Rae see Moral Choices, 335-338).
58
Blomberg, 124.
59
Hollinger, Choosing the Good, 229-232.
60
Ibid., 64-69.
61
Ibid., 70-86.
62
Ibid., 56-58.
63
Ibid., 39-43; 135-131.
64
Tim Keller, Counterfeit Gods (New York: Dutton, 2009).
65
Brian Rosner, Greed as Idolatry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 45.
66
Blomberg, Neither Poverty nor Riches, 119.
67
See James Davison Hunter, To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World (New
York: Oxford, 2010).
68
Hollinger, 242-254.
69
Sider, 187-190.
70
Ibid., 230-33.
71
Blomberg, Neither Poverty nor Riches, 84.
72
Ibid.
73
Ibid., 133-146.
74
Ibid., 149-176.
75
Ibid., 211-212.
16