In Matthew 6, Jesus warns his disciples against trying to serve two masters, God and mammon. An overly strict interpretation of that injunction would seem to leave economics outside the realm of Christian theological inquiry.
But the most fundamental of all economic endeavors, pursuit of a livelihood, is rather essential to human existence, a prerequisite of spiritual development. Jesus was decrying the worship of mammon, not its necessity for human sustenance. The study of how best to create wealth and use it efficiently for human advancement is seldom deemed a sin.
This truth was acknowledged in 1999 when the Center of Theological Inquiry (CTI) in Princeton, N.J., launched a study project called “God and Globalization.” The 20 participants from a variety of disciplines recognized that the burgeoning integration and interdependence of national and regional economies resulting from reduced barriers to trade and finance has had profound social and political implications. It has raised millions of human beings out of poverty. The theologians among the CTI scholars are largely friendly toward the role free-market capitalism has played in this remarkable transformation. That’s a welcome relief from the style of theology that too often distrusts the normal impulses of human beings to improve their material well-being.
Nothing is inherently sinful about using imagination and effort in productivity that creates wealth available on a discretionary basis for purposes beyond mere survival. Whether we serve Godly or evil ends depends not on the enormity or the tinyness of our ambitions for wealth, but on how we put wealth to work.
I am reminded of persons who misquote a Biblical admonishing the use of money. I have heard persons saying “..money is the root of all evil..” But the correct Biblican quotation is “..the love of money is the root of all evil..”
re#2 – “..the love of money is the root of all evil..†as translated in the King James Version
[KJV 1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.]
is probably not as good a translation as “a root of all kinds of evil” or “a root of all sorts of evil” as in the translations below, including the New King James Version,
NASB 1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
NKJV 1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
ASB 1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
KJV 1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
http://www.biblegateway.com/ for an online way to compare
My take on this issue is that Jesus condemned the application of material measures, such as the relative wealth differences between men, to the assessment of the moral character of men and the things they do, instead favoring measures assessing the purposes of things men do, think and believe and the outcomes these produce. Applying these latter two measures provides the key to unlocking Jesus’ commercial parables, such as the parable of the talents and the parable of the shrewd manager.
To test this, apply the latter two measures to the rich young man’s decision not to divest himself and follow Jesus. In the young man’s mind, was his wealth not a measure of his moral character à le Job, and did Jesus’ command that he divest himself not confront him with the fallacy of that measure? Yet socialist theologians miss this obvious point, focusing instead on the “eye of the needle” and “give it to the poor” bits. Why? Because they also apply material measures to assess the moral character of men, just as the rich young man did to himself, thereby barring himself from the Kingdom of Heaven. It can be no surprise, then, that Utopian socialism, which measures Heaven on Earth as man’s universal freedom from economic inequality and want, invariably produces dystopian squalor.
It’s about the hierarchy of Kingdom goods. “Consider the birds of the air…” “Seek ye first…” and caution “the love of money is….”
What’s up, simply, is “Foxes have holes… but the Son of man has no place to lay his head… .” Every excuse for the accumulation of wealth is just that — an excuse. We have little faith, let’s face it.
What are “Kingdom goods”, and what’s their heiarchy? What’s their exchange rate here on earth for necessaries such as a loaf of bread for a hungry guy?
If many people are poor and in need of work, then the guy who they want to accumulate wealth is the guy who knows how to make more wealth with it. Solidarity makes no sense when it means, “Everyone is better off if everyone is worse off”. Is solidarity a Kingdom good?