Worship Without Justice is No Worship

I am encouraged the emergent church is maturing and committing to issues of justice. Their energy and heart for God are another sign of the coming of THE Kingdom! Here's to praying relative Orthodoxy leads to practical Orthopraxy.

Preying on Our Fears for a Buck

Today I read an article at Marketwatch.com that is offensive to the world view I propose God has granted his followers. I would suggest following this articles instructions would create just the type of world he says is coming...one of scarcity, fear and The End of Civilization because he implores you to act "uncivilized" as a first, not last, act.

I propose there is greater poverty in Paul Farrell's world view than the one that would come for the men and women who follow the Golden Rule which is the antidote to this poverty of life and thought.

Paul B. Farrell

Jul 28, 2009, 12:01 a.m. EST

Surviving the 'End of Civilization' 2050

Six rules for investing in the worse-case scenario

By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- In his 2008 bestseller, "Wealth, War and Wisdom," hedge fund manager Barton Biggs warns that investors must "assume the possibility of a breakdown of the civilized infrastructure."

And to prepare for a breakdown of civilization, "your safe haven must be self-sufficient and capable of growing some kind of food ... It should be well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc." Bloomberg Markets suggested that by "etc." he meant guns, as Biggs added "a few rounds over the approaching brigands' heads would probably be a compelling persuader that there are easier farms to pillage."

The end of Wall Street

Chapter Three: This final chapter of the crisis on Wall Street tells the story of the $700-billion bailout, as seen through a reporter's eyes, and looks at what's ahead for the global economy.

That warning's not from a hippie radical. Biggs was a respected Wall Street guru at Morgan Stanley for 30 years. As the chief global strategist Institutional Investor magazine put him on its "All-America Research Team" 10 times. Smart Money said: "Biggs is without question the premier prognosticator on the international scene and a mover of markets from Argentina to Hong Kong."

Biggs is advising America's wealthy elite. But what about Main Street Americans? Investors often ask me where to invest today, even Bogleheads and investors committed to the Lazy Portfolio strategy. They see the Goldman Conspiracy manipulating this rally. That worries many.

What do you believe? What value do you give to "the future." First, answer these three questions: What's your investment strategy if you know you might die on Dec. 21, 2012, or possibly this year after getting a negative diagnosis from an oncologist or maybe not till 2050 when the United Nations says global population will be 50% higher (from 6 billion now to 9 billion), while demand for energy, oil, gas and coal doubles and the global supply of those commodities remains relatively constant.

Disaster films, terminal illnesses, 2050 and 'The End'

Behavioral economists have answers. But your gut's also good at predicting. So here's what you'll likely do:

1. You'll go see the new disaster film, "2012" about the end of the Mayan calendar. After all, it's by the same director who "destroyed" the earth in "The Day After Tomorrow," "Independence Day" and "Godzilla." No new investment strategies, but a must-see film, a great catharsis and distraction.

2. If you had a terminal illness, the future is here, now. There's no tomorrow. You're concerned about protecting loved ones and future generations with what you have, and enjoying time with them.

3. But how to invest for the "End of Civilization" coming around 2050? The next 40 years will be confusing: Accelerating struggles between aging populations and disenchanted youth, soaring commodity prices, global warming, peak oil, food shortages, famine, blackouts, rationing, civil disorder, increasing crime, worldwide jihads, riots, anarchy and other dark scenarios of a tomorrow with "warfare defining human life."

Yes, that's how doomsayers label the worst-case scenario. It also must be what Ultra-Conservative-Guru Biggs worries about in his darker moments.

So back to the question: What will Main Street investors do? Here again, even with the planet's survival threatened, they'll go watch "2012," be entertained, experience a catharsis, feel relieved, and afterwards, have dinner, slip back into denial. And later, they'll vote against anything that offers solutions to future problems, especially if it raises taxes.

Why? Very simple: Our "Brains Aren't Wired to Fear the Future," writes New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. We're wired to respond to crises, while pushing off the real big problems (health care, Social Security, etc.)

That's basic behavioral economics: Over tens of thousands of years, evolution has programmed our brains so that collectively we will behave counter-productive with the future, making an "End of Civilization" scenario inevitable, a foregone conclusion, a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why? Because our brains are handicapped, we are literally incapable of acting soon enough to solve the problem.

Six simple rules

But there must be a very small percentage of you out there with a desire to make your remaining days on Earth as pleasant as possible for you and your loved ones. So here are "Six New Rules till the End of Civilization 2050." If they don't scare you, hopefully they'll amuse you. Or better yet, wake you up, maybe get you into action ... before it's too late ... before your grandkids are fighting over what little is left:

1. Greed is really good

Yes, if you are going to follow the same advice as the rich, you and your family always come first. Grab more than your share, many times what's fair. No remorse, because 2050 is coming sooner than you think. Create a protective wall of money and resources that will make whatever time's left as comfortable as possible.

2. Invest in Goldman Sachs and its Wall Street co-conspirators

Seriously, these guys are the poster boys for the word "greed." The Goldman Gang, Goldman Conspiracy, whatever you call them, these guys just took control of Washington and the Treasury; their rapid recovery is proof that "greed is great." Do what they do. Amass as much capital and goods as possible, ignoring the rest of us, then cruise to the finish line.

3. Frugality, stockpiling, hoarding

"The Millionaire Next Door" says it's very simple: "Frugal Frugal Frugal! ... Millionaires live well below their means ... Being frugal is the cornerstone of wealth-building." That way you can stash away lots more for later when the going gets rough, when others attack to get what you've stockpiled.

4. Return to your roots

Remember Biggs' advice about subsistence farming. Survival instincts and personal ingenuity will be your best investment. Your family could be without electricity, water, gasoline in the final days, so keep "well-stocked with seed, fertilizer, canned food, wine, medicine, clothes, etc. Think Swiss Family Robinson."

5. Global warfare, plus ammo and guns

Five years ago Fortune did report on the "Pentagon's Weather Nightmare." Yes, the military warned of "the mother of all national security issues" as "the planet's carrying capacity shrinks, an ancient pattern reemerges: the eruption of desperate all-out wars over food, water, and energy supplies." So invest in the defense industries America needs as the rest of the world reacts more to our greed.

6. Accept death

Back in 1973, my first year at Morgan Stanley, I read Ernest Becker's brilliant Pulitzer Prize winner, "The Denial of Death." Today his message is even more powerful: Yes we will all die, tomorrow. But to enjoy the days left, you must accept death today ... accept even now as behavioral economists warn us that our brains are our own worst enemy, as well as the planet's, for we are on a self-destruct path of no return.

Parable at the Pearly Gates

Too macabre for you? So you don't miss the satire, here is a final message, in the spirit of Milton Berle's classic movie, "Always Leave Them Laughing." It's from USA Today, told by that great comedian Carol Leifer:

"Mother Teresa died and went to heaven. God greeted her at the Pearly Gates. 'Be thou hungry, Mother Teresa?' asked God. 'I could eat,' Mother Teresa replied. So God opened a can of tuna and reached for a chunk of rye bread, and they began to share it. While eating this humble meal, Mother Teresa looked down into hell and saw the inhabitants devouring huge steaks, lobsters and pastries. Curious but deeply trusting, she remained quiet.

"The next day God again invited her to join him for a meal. Again, it was tuna and rye bread. Once again, Mother Teresa could see the denizens of hell enjoying lamb, turkey and delicious desserts. Still she said nothing.

"The following day, mealtime arrived and another can of tuna was opened. She couldn't contain herself any longer. Meekly, she asked, 'God, I am grateful to be in heaven with you. But here in heaven all I get to eat is tuna and a piece of rye bread, and in the Other Place, they eat like emperors and kings! I just don't understand it.' God sighed. 'Let's be honest, Teresa,' he said. 'For just two people, it doesn't pay to cook.'"

So, cheer up, maybe the "End of Civilization" won't be all that bad, even for Wall Street, if you take Barton Biggs advice and stock up on something other than tuna and crackers. END

I propose there is greater poverty in Paul Farrell's world view than the one that would come for the men and women who follow the Golden Rule which is the antidote to this poverty of life and thought.

Beauty Will Save the World: An Essay by Solzhenitsyn

Beauty Will Save the World

by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

---

Like that bewildered savage who has picked up a strange object… perhaps something thrown up by the sea, perhaps disinterred from the sands or dropped from the heavens…an object intricate in its convolutions, which shines first with a dull glow and then with a bright shaft of light…who keeps turning it over and over in his hands in an effort to find some way of putting it to use, seeking some humble function for it, which is within his limited grasp, never conceiving of a higher purpose…

Chad Kyojun Kleitsch

So we, too, holding art in our hands vaingloriously considering ourselves to be its master, undertake brazenly to give it direction, to renovate it, reform it, to issue manifestoes about it, to sell it for money. We use it to play up to those who possess power. We employ it at times for amusement—even in music-hall songs and night clubs—and also at times, grabbing hold of it however we can, for transient and limited political and social needs. But art is not desecrated by our carryings-on. It does not lose sight of its own origins because of them. And each time and in each mode of use it sheds on us a portion of its secret inner light.

But can we embrace all that light? Who is there so bold as to proclaim that he has defined art? That he has enumerated all its facets? Yet perhaps in ages past someone did comprehend and define it for us, but we grew impatient: we listened in passing and paid no heed and discarded it immediately in our eternal haste to replace even the very best with something else just because it is new! And then later on, when what is old is restated, we forgot that we heard it before.

One artist imagines himself the creator of an independent spiritual world and takes on his shoulders the act of creating that world and its population, assuming total responsibility for it—but he stumbles and breaks down because there is no mortal genius capable of bearing such a load; just like man, who once declared himself the center of all existence but was incapable of creating a balanced spiritual system. And then, when failure occurs, it is all blamed on the external disharmony of the world, on the complexity of the shattered contemporary soul, or the stupidity of the public.

Another artist realizes that there is a supreme force above him and works away gladly as a small apprentice beneath God’s heaven, even though his responsibility for everything he draws or writes and for the souls which perceives it is all the more strict. But still: it was not he who created this world, nor is it he who provides it with direction, and he has no doubts of its foundations. The artist is only given to sense more keenly than others the harmony of the world and all the beauty and savagery of man’s contribution to it—and to communicate this poignantly to people. And even in the midst of failure and down at the lowest depths of existence—in poverty, prison, illness—the sensation of a stable harmony will never leave him.

However, all the irrationality of art, its blinding twists and turns, its unpredictable discoveries, its soul-shaking impact on people are too magical to be contained within the world-outlook of an artist, in his conception or in the work of his unworthy fingers.

Harrison Mitchell

Archaeologists have not yet discovered any stage of human existence without art. Even in the half-light before the dawn of humanity we received this gift from Hands we did not manage to discern. Nor have we managed to ask: Why was this gift given to us and what are we to do with it?

And all those prophets who are predicting that art is disintegrating, that it has used up all its forms, that it is dying, are mistaken. We are the ones who shall die. And art will remain. The question is whether before we perish we shall understand all its aspects and all its ends.

Not all can be given names. Some of them go beyond words. Art opens even the chilled, darkened heart to high spiritual experience. Through the instrumentality of art we are sometimes sent—vaguely, briefly—insights which logical processes of thought cannot attain.

Like the tiny mirror of the fairy tale: you look into it and see—not yourself—but for one fleeting moment the Unattainable to which you cannot leap or fly. And the heart aches…

Dostoyevsky once let drop the enigmatic phrase: “Beauty will save the world.” What does this mean? For a long time it used to seem to me that this was a mere phrase. Just how could such a thing be possible? When had it ever happened in the bloodthirsty course of history that beauty had saved anyone from anything? Beauty had provided embellishment certainly, given uplift—but whom had it ever saved?

However, there is a special quality in the essence of beauty, a special quality in the status of art: the conviction carried by a genuine work of art is absolutely indisputable and tames even the strongly opposed heart. One can construct a political speech, an assertive journalistic polemic, a program for organizing society, a philosophical system, so that in appearance it is smooth, well structured, and yet it is built upon a mistake, a lie; and the hidden element, the distortion, will not immediately become visible. And a speech, or a journalistic essay, or a program in rebuttal, or a different philosophical structure can be counterposed to the first—and it will seem just as well constructed and as smooth, and everything will seem to fit. And therefore one has faith in them—yet one has no faith.

It is vain to affirm that which the heart does not confirm. In contrast, a work of art bears within itself its own confirmation: concepts which are manufactured out of whole cloth or overstrained will not stand up to being tested in images, will somehow fall apart and turn out to be sickly and pallid and convincing to no one. Works steeped in truth and presenting it to us vividly alive will take hold of us, will attract us to themselves with great power- and no one, ever, even in a later age, will presume to negate them. And so perhaps that old trinity of Truth and Good and Beauty is not just the formal outworn formula it used to seem to us during our heady, materialistic youth. If the crests of these three trees join together, as the investigators and explorers used to affirm, and if the too obvious, too straight branches of Truth and Good are crushed or amputated and cannot reach the light—yet perhaps the whimsical, unpredictable, unexpected branches of Beauty will make their way through and soar up to that very place and in this way perform the work of all three.

And in that case it was not a slip of the tongue for Dostoyevsky to say that “Beauty will save the world,” but a prophecy. After all, he was given the gift of seeing much, he was extraordinarily illumined.

And consequently perhaps art, literature, can in actual fact help the world of today.

Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn is the author of major works of fiction such as Cancer Ward and The First Circle, and of several works of history, above all the volumes of the Gulag Archipelago.

Excerpted from Beauty Will Save the World: The Nobel Lecture on Literature by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Copyright © 1970 by the Nobel Foundation. Reprinted by permission of the Nobel Foundation.

Travel Light

"Nothing makes a journey more difficult than a heavy backpack filled with nice but unnecessary things."  R. Alcorn  from The Treasure Principle

Wise Caution for 'The Rest of Us' on Life and Love

The Voice Claims Another Victim

By Cal Thomas

Tribune Media Services

The first thing that should be acknowledged about South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s admission to an extramarital affair is that it could happen to any of us. That is not an excuse (and no, it has not happened to me, or to my wife). Every married person has heard the voice; the one that says you deserve something “better.”

Gov. Sanford should have been familiar with the voice because of the Bible studies he attended. The voice began seducing humanity a long time ago. It told our first parents that they needed more than the perfection of Eden. The voice told them that God knew that if they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil they would be like God. But they already were like God, because they were made in His image.

Stick with me you secularists and non-literalists, because there is a point to be made for you, too.

Psychiatrists explain that married people tire of one another after 10 or 20 years (it used to be seven years, as in that Marilyn Monroe/Tom Ewell film “The Seven Year Itch.” Must be inflation.). Good marriages are the result of hard work. Forsaking all others is more than a wedding promise. It is a daily denial of one’s lower instincts. Temptation is everywhere. The key to overcoming it is to realize you are fighting an adversarial force that wants to destroy you, embarrass you and cause ridicule to be heaped on the God you claim to worship.

One can make excuses about power and loneliness and starting out as a friendship that develops into something else, as Gov. Sanford rambled on about, but one can’t explain adultery. It is what it is and the person who commits it should be calling on God for mercy, not the voters for understanding.

I once asked evangelist Billy Graham if he experienced temptations of the flesh when he was young. He said, “of course.” How did he deal with them? With passion he responded, “I asked God to strike me dead before He ever allowed me to dishonor Him in that way.” That is the kind of seriousness one needs to overcome the temptations of a corrupt culture in which shameful behavior is too often paraded in the streets.

There was a time when a divorce would disqualify someone from public office. Now people admit affairs and expect to stay in office. “It’s just sex,” said defenders of Bill Clinton. One might as well say, “it was just a gun” that killed my spouse. Adultery wounds in ways a bullet cannot. One can potentially heal from a bullet wound, but a shot to the soul and to the trust that must be central to any marriage is nearly impossible to repair. The wounded spouse always wonders, “Will he/she do it again?”

A relationship most promise to venerate “until death us do part” is damaged by adultery, whether it’s a TV evangelist, a politician or a regular Joe who violates the marriage bed. In fact, we rarely even use the word “adultery” anymore because it sounds so, uh, biblical, and those teachings and commands long ago fell out of fashion, though they work for those who embrace them.

Any man who claims never to have had thoughts of straying is a liar. Any man who has sought the help of God and other men in helping him to honor his marriage promises to his wife and children is a hero, especially in today’s morally exhausted culture.

I miss Paul Harvey and his acknowledgement of those who had been married 50, 60, even 70 years. Those people are my role models. I’m sure they heard the voice, too, but they told it to get lost and it did. Pushing against weights builds up the body, pushing against the voice builds up the soul and improves a marriage. You can never take a marriage — or the voice — for granted; it’s always on the prowl looking for new people to destroy.

Money, Greed, and God: An Interview with Jay Richards

Because Affluence and right thinking about our culture and systems of government are often a topic of this blog I want everyone reading to see the following interview of Jay Richards from www.revkevindeyoung.com. The book is timely and a great opportunity to work through a deeper and more spiritual understanding of 'real economics' in our world and why "greed isn't good" and capitalism isn't bad. Without a biblical ethos and appropriate rule of law markets fall apart. This is a good interview.

Money, Greed, and God: An Interview with Jay Richards

When I’m not reading history or theology I am often reading economics. I find the interplay between Christian commitment and economics fascinating, and filled with misunderstandings. If you’ve ever had questions about capitalism, and in particular whether or not a generous Christian can really support capitalism, I would encourage you to read Jay Richards’ new book Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism is the Solution and Not the Problem. Whether the title makes you say “Amen” or makes you want to roll your eyes into the back of your head, I would recommend this book as the best, most easily accessible, defense of capitalism from a Christian perspective.

Here is an interview with Jay Richards I conducted by email.

1. Tell us a little bit about yourself. Where are you from? What is your current vocation? Are you married? Do you have children?

I was born and raised in Amarillo, TX. I am married to Ginny (we just celebrated our eighteenth anniversary), and we have two lovely daughters, Gillian (10) and Ellie (6).

I worked full time at Discovery Institute for 7 1/2 years (in Seattle) and at Acton Institute for three years. We attended a CRC Church in Grand Rapids. At the moment, though, we're out in the Seattle area while my wife finishes some course work for a masters degree. I'm getting to write full time as a Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation. We're writing a series of booklets on economic topics for ordinary, non-wonkish, people. I'm also editing a collection of articles designed to bridge the growing divide between social and fiscal conservatives. It's scheduled to be released in late summer.


2. How did you become a Christian? What is your current church like and how are you involved?

I attended a mainline Presbyterian Church in Amarillo, and was a more or less conventional, mainline, Christian. In college, I had a crisis of faith, but was brought back from the brink through the writings of C.S. Lewis.


3. You didn't always see the benefit to a market economy. Tell us a little bit about your story as you moved from strong opposition to capitalism to seeing the Christian virtues on the free market.

In college, I fell for many of the socialist-left ideas popular at the time (and which are regrettably making a comeback). Happily, I happened to read some good economics, including a terrific book on Marxism by Thomas Sowell. I also read Ayn Rand, which destroyed the vision of collectivism. By the time I was a senior in college, the luster of socialism had worn off. But it will still several years before I thought a Christian could defend capitalism. I suppose I had accepted Rand's argument, but rejected the idea that greed was a virtue. I thought capitalism "worked," but was still morally problematic. Once I read George Gilder's Wealth and Poverty, and Michael Novak's The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, I changed my mind. This was actually when I was at Union Seminary in Virginia, and having to read Gustavo Gutierrez's Theology of Liberation for the third time. I went looking for a counterbalance, and discovered Gilder and Novak.


4. In your book, you unpack eight mistakes Christians make with economics. I don't want to make you rewrite the whole book for this interview, but could you give a one sentence description of each myth?

Here's how I summarize the eight myths in my book:

The nirvana myth (contrasting capitalism with an unrealizable ideal rather than with its live alternatives)
The piety myth (focusing on our good intentions rather than the unintended consequences of our actions)
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 (believing that charging interest on money is always exploitative)
The artsy myth (confusing aesthetic judgments with economic arguments)
The freeze frame myth (believing that things always stay the same—for example, assuming that population trends will continue indefinitely or treating a current “natural resource” as if it will always be needed)

I linked the myths to eight corresponding questions:

Can’t we build a just society?
What does God require of us as Christians?
Doesn’t capitalism foster unfair competition?
If I become rich, won’t someone else become poor?
Isn’t capitalism based on greed?
Has Christianity ever really embraced capitalism?
Doesn’t capitalism lead to an ugly consumerist culture?
Do we take more than our fair share? That is, isn’t our modern
lifestyle causing us to use up all the natural resources?

I struggled with this taxonomy for a while, but I do think the vast majority of bad thinking on economics among Christians can be placed in one of these eight categories.


5. Do you recommend that churches offer fair trade coffee?

In general, I don't think fair trade coffee makes sense economically (see pages 39-42), although I also don't think it's as problematic as many coercive strategies, such as wealth redistribution. I've recently learned that there is some diversity among fair trade organizations, especially among Christian ministries. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to speak too harshly of fair trade without nuancing, since it is normally an expression of a charitable impulse, and it appears, at least on the surface, to be a market-oriented way of dealing with third world poverty.


6. On page 35, you write "Spiritually you're better off a little mixed up about economics than indifferent to human suffering. Economically, though, only what you do is important, whatever your reason." This seems to be a very important point for the book. What are you trying to say in these two sentences?

When I wrote: "Spiritually you're better off a little mixed up about economics than indifferent to human suffering. Economically, though, only what you do is important, whatever your reason," I was trying to balance but capture Gilson's "Piety is no substitute for technique." To me, this is one of most important points I've tried to make. Motivation IS important when we're considering our spiritual state before God. It's just that our motivation for a policy has nothing to do with the real world effects of the policy. I think that Christians often weight our (and others') motivations far too heavily on economic matters. It's as if we think feeling bad about poverty is more obligatory than actually doing something that helps the poor. For instance, several times in churches I've pointed out why minimum wage laws don't really help the poor in the long run. I've never had anyone try to debunk the argument, but several times I've received the complaint that my argument shows that I'm not really concerned about the poor. It doesn't of course. But even if it were evidence that I weren't concerned about the poor, the argument's validity (or lack thereof) would remain the same.


7. I'm sure that you will get some feedback from libertarians for your critique of Ayn Rand. Some might be surprised that you would criticize Rand in a book promoting free market capitalism. What, in your opinion, does Rand get wrong?

My criticism of Rand is central to my argument. In my view, she rightly defended free markets, limited government, and the importance of entrepreneurs, but she located those arguments in a deeply flawed atheistic philosophy. Without going into all the problems with Objectivism, I criticize her defense of greed, as well as her identification of greed with capitalism. I also argue that she confuses Adam Smith's arguments about self-interest with selfishness. If Rand is right about capitalism, it seems to me, then it would be very hard for Christians to be capitalists. That said, as I mention in the book, Rand actually was important in helping me to purge my socialist sympathies.


8. You finish the book with "Ten Ways to Alleviate Poverty; or, Creating Wealth in Ten Tough Steps." Why are the rule of law (number one) and a formal property system (number three) so important to the alleviation of poverty?

Rule of law is a prerequisite for a free market even to exist. A free market is not anarchy, as some critics who talk about "unbridled capitalism" seem to imply. For a market to be free, exchanges must be voluntary, which means they must be perceived as a benefit for all participants. This is what makes a free market a positive-sum game by definition. If the strong can steal from their weaker neighbors with impunity, in contrast, they have little motivation for looking for win-win exchanges. Rule of law encourages participants in a market to seek out exchanges that are mutually beneficial, even if the participants have immoral motives. That's a good thing.

In arguing for the importance of private property and titling in raising people out of poverty, I'm following Hernando de Soto's important arguments in The Mystery of Capital. These laws and methods allow land to become assets, to become property, to be compared with and traded with other assets. This opens up all sorts of wealth-creating activities that the first world takes for granted, but which is still lacking in much of the developing world.


9. You go out of your way to argue that the universe is divinely ordered and purposeful. What difference does this make for our approach to economics?

I think that a culture's general beliefs about the nature of reality can have significant economic consequences. For instance, if one believes that the world is orderly and designed for a purpose, one is more likely to look for, and discover, aspects of that order. Moreover, these beliefs can encourage optimism, delayed gratification and a motivation to make the world a better place. Finally, it prevents one from reducing economics to materialism. The most important truths of economics emerge from the reality of the human person. That reality requires a theological/philosophical framework that can accommodate it.

Of course, to offset utopian tendencies, these beliefs are best tempered with a healthy realization of our flaws. In the Christian worldview, original sin fulfills this function.


10. What advice would you give pastors as they preach on money?

I would have two main words of advice for any pastor who wants to preach about money. First, look carefully at the what Scripture and the Christian tradition actually say about money. Second, get acquainted with some basic truths of economics. There are empirical realities in economics, just as there are in chemistry and physics. It's not all hopelessly laden with ideology. And it doesn't require advanced degrees in economics. If a pastor shows that he understands some economics, he's much more likely to be taken seriously when he speaks prophetically about money to his parishioners. I suppose I wrote the book, in part, to help pastors do just that.

Contentment

When was the last time you rested like this?




On the plane home from Denver yesterday I read a statistic that I thought was very interesting. The statistic said that 80 plus percent of peoples stress was derived from "financial pressures". I resemble the majority of those in the study!

In America in 2009 perhaps a little context is in order? The Creator of this world has a few words for us!

"Godliness with contentment is great gain. For I brought nothing into the world, and I can take nothing out of it. But if I have food and clothing, with these I will be content." I Timothy 6:6-8