PREFACE And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh (Eccl. 12:12).
When I began writing my economic commentary on the Bible in the spring of 1973,(1) I did not imagine that it would take me over two decades just to begin Numbers. When I escalated my time commitment to the project in the fall of 1977 to 10 hours per week, 50 weeks per year, I also did not imagine that it would take this long. I did not imagine that I would write such lengthy appendixes as Dominion and Common Grace, Is the World Running Down?, and Political Polytheism. But most remarkable of all, I did not imagine that what now appears to be a 30-year task to complete the Pentateuch will, if completed, turn out to be the world's longest footnote to another man's thesis: Ray Sutton's 1985 discovery of the Bible's five-point covenant structure.(2) (Not four, not six, not seven: five. I also want to make it unambiguously clear that I am talking only about a covenant model.(3)) The five points of the biblical covenant model are:
1. Transcendence/immanence/sovereignty
2. Hierarchy/representation/authority
3. Ethics/boundaries/dominion
4. Oath/judgment/sanctions
5. Succession/inheritance/continuity
The acronym in English is THEOS, the Greek word for God.
I am not alone in my surprise. When I hired David Chilton to write a commentary on the Book of Revelation, neither of us imagined that his Days of Vengeance (1987) would also wind up as an eloquent footnote to Sutton's That You May Prosper (1987), but it did.(4) Prior to Sutton's discovery, Chilton had been totally bogged down for over a year, unable to complete the book's manuscript. After he heard Sutton present his discovery at a Wednesday evening Bible study that he and I attended, Chilton re-structured the manuscript, added some new material, and completed it within a few months. Seven years after its publication, critics have not yet attempted to refute Chilton's book, let alone Sutton's. (Note: a brief negative book review is not a refutation. Rather, it is a public notice of the need for one.)
While I have never been bogged down with any volume in this set of economic commentaries, there is no doubt that Tools of Dominion and especially Boundaries and Dominion would have looked very different if Sutton had not made his discovery, and I had not grasped its importance for my work. The five points of the biblical covenant are crucial for understanding Leviticus.
The Pentateuch's Five-Point Covenant Structure As far as I am aware, what no one had seen -- or at least no one had published -- when I began this commentary project is this: the Pentateuch is structured in terms of the Bible's five-point covenant model. I recognized this structure of the five books of Moses only after I had finished reading (as I recall) the third draft of Sutton's manuscript. My discovery forced me to think through my strategy for the entire commentary. I wrote a Preface at the last minute for The Sinai Strategy (1986), introducing the five-point model. Then I wrote a General Introduction to the entire economic commentary series in the second edition of The Dominion Covenant: Genesis (1987).
So far, I have completed commentaries on only three of the five books of the Pentateuch. I can say with considerable confidence that the first three books of the Pentateuch conform to the model. I can see that the last two also conform, although I have not worked through them in detail yet. Honest critics who reject Sutton's thesis will eventually have to take into account my commentaries and the support volumes I have published. (Dishonest critics will, as usual, murmur in private to their students that nothing has been proven, that this model is all smoke and mirrors. But I am confident that they will not go into print on this, also as usual.)(5) Here is the five-point outline of the Pentateuch:
Genesis
Genesis clearly is a book dealing with God's transcendence. Transcendence is point one of the biblical covenant model. The opening words of Genesis affirm God as Creator, testifying to God's absolute transcendence, the foundation of the Creator-creature distinction: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Gen. 1:1). God established a hierarchy through His covenant: mankind over nature (Gen. 1:26-28), each man ruling over his wife (Gen. 2:18). He gave them a law: no eating from the prohibited tree (Gen. 2:17a). He promised to bring judgment against them if they disobeyed (Gen. 2:17b). They violated His law, but out of His grace, God promised them an heir (Gen. 3:15). Here are the five points of the biblical covenant model.
What is the story of Abraham all about? It is the story of a promise that was sealed by a covenant act and sign (circumcision). Tribal Israel's story is one of covenant-breaking, God's negative sanctions, and the renewal of Abraham's covenant. Genesis ends with Jacob's verbal blessings and cursings on his sons. Jacob transferred the inheritance, tribe by tribe. Then he died. But above all, Genesis is the story of God the absolutely sovereign Creator and providential Sustainer of history, the transcendent God who has revealed Himself to His people.
Exodus
Exodus is clearly the book of the covenant itself. "And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient" (Ex. 24:7). "And the king commanded all the people, saying, Keep the passover unto the LORD your God, as it is written in the book of this covenant" (II Ki. 23:21). God established His authority over the Israelites by delivering them out of Egypt. This is what Kline calls historical prologue: point two of the covenant.(6) But what did the historical prologue of an ancient covenant treaty affirm? Hierarchy: the power of the king over all of his rivals. Exodus was written to prove that God was above Pharaoh in history. Hierarchy, not historical prologue, is the heart of point two of the biblical covenant model.
God brought visible historical sanctions against Egypt. This was evidence of His covenantal authority in history. Deny God's predictable covenantal corporate sanctions in New Covenant history, and you necessarily deny the historical prologue aspect of the New Covenant. You reduce the rule of the God of the New Testament to the status of a supreme ruler of a priestly hierarchy. You deny His kingly authority.(7) This leaves Christians at the mercy of a divine State -- the divine rule of politics. It leaves them without any possibility of constructing either a systematically biblical political theory or a broader Christian social theory.(8)
One important implication of point two is that God has established the hierarchical principle of judicial representation. The principle of representation began with God's call to Moses out of the burning bush, telling him to go before Pharaoh as His representative. God delivered the Israelites from Egypt, and then He met with Moses, their representative, at Sinai. In Exodus 18, Moses established a hierarchical civil appeals court system, whereupon God met with Moses as Israel's representative and delivered His covenant law. The Book of Exodus is a book about rival kings and rival kingdoms, God vs. Pharaoh.(9) Men must subordinate themselves either to God or Satan through their covenantal representatives.
The Book of Exodus is easily divided into five sections: 1) the intervention of God into history to deliver His people; 2) the establishment of Israel's judicial hierarchy; 3) the giving of the law; 4) the judgment of Israel after the golden calf incident; and 5) the building of the tabernacle, which they would carry with them into Canaan. Also, the Ten Commandments are divided into two sets of five points, each set paralleling Sutton's five-point model.(10) The first commandment, honoring God, is paralleled by the sixth commandment, the prohibition against murdering man. Man is made in God's image. The fifth commandment, honoring father and mother (household priests), has to do with succession: that we may live long lives in God's land. The tenth commandment, the prohibition against covetousness, also has to do with succession: not desiring to appropriate another person's inheritance.
Leviticus
Leviticus is the book that established Israel's ritual and moral boundaries. It is therefore about dominion, for boundaries in the Bible are always associated with dominion. The third point of the biblical covenant deals with boundaries. The third commandment deals with the prohibition of obscenity and false oaths and incantations (magical power), thereby affirming a boundary surrounding God's name and implying dominion through ethics rather than magical invocation,(11) and the eighth commandment parallels the third, for it is law three in the second list of five.(12) "Thou shalt not steal" is a command regarding legal boundaries.(13) The eighth commandment indicates that the concept of boundaries is basic to economic ethics, the third point of the covenant.(14)
Gordon Wenham comments on Leviticus' place in the Old Testament's covenant-treaty structure: "(3) The centerpiece of every treaty was the stipulations section. In collections of law, such as Hammurabi's, the laws formed the central section. The same holds for the biblical collections of law. In the treaties a basic stipulation of total fidelity to the suzerain may be distinguished from the more detailed stipulations covering specific problems. In this terminology `Be holy' could be described as the basic stipulation of Leviticus. The other laws explain what this means in different situations."(15) Leviticus is literally the center of the Pentateuch: two books precede it; two books follow it.
God sets apart His people and their worship. He makes them holy -- set apart. He places ritual boundaries around them. "Leviticus centers around the concept of the holiness of God, and how an unholy people can acceptably approach Him and then remain in continued fellowship. The way to God is only through blood sacrifice, and the walk with God is only through obedience to His laws."(16) The issue is sanctification, and this requires boundaries: "The Israelites serve a holy God who requires them to be holy as well. To be holy means to be `set apart' or `separated.' They are to be separated from other nations unto God. In Leviticus the idea of holiness appears eighty-seven times, sometimes indicating ceremonial holiness (ritual requirements), and at other times moral holiness (purity of life)."(17) R. K. Harrison writes that the first 15 chapters deal with sacrificial principles and procedures relating to the removal of sin. "The last eleven chapters emphasize ethics, morality and holiness. The unifying theme of the book is the insistent emphasis upon God's holiness, coupled with the demand that the Israelites shall exemplify this spiritual attribute in their own lives."(18) Holiness means separation from the heathen.(19) It means boundaries.
Numbers
I have not begun my commentary on Numbers, so I will be brief. Numbers is the book of God's judgment against Israel in the wilderness. Judgment is point four of the biblical covenant model: God's response to oath-keeping or oath-breaking. God judged them when they refused to accept the testimony of Joshua and Caleb regarding the vulnerability of Canaan to invasion (Num. 14). They rebelled against Him, and He punished the nation by delaying their entry into Canaan until they were all dead, except Joshua and Caleb. "Numbers records the failure of Israel to believe in the promise of God and the resulting judgment of wandering in the wilderness for forty years."(20) Furthermore, "Israel as a nation is in its infancy at the outset of this book, only thirteen months after the exodus from Egypt. In Numbers, the book of divine discipline, it becomes necessary for the nation to go through the painful process of testing and maturation. God must teach His people the consequences of irresponsible decisions. The forty years of wilderness experience transforms them from a rabble of ex-slaves into a nation ready to take the Promised Land. Numbers begins with the old generation (1:1-10:10), moves through a tragic transitional period (10:11-25:18), and ends with the new generation (26-36) at the doorway to the land of Canaan."(21)
Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy is the book of Israel's inheritance, point five of the biblical covenant model. "It is addressed to the new generation destined to possess the land of promise -- those who survived the forty years of wilderness wandering."(22) The children of the generation of the exodus renewed their covenant with God and inherited Canaan on this basis. Moses blessed the tribes (Deut. 33), a traditional sign of inheritance in the Old Testament (Gen. 27; 49). Moses died outside the land, but before he died, God allowed him to look from Mt. Nebo into the promised land (Deut. 34:4). He saw the inheritance. The book closes with the elevation of Joshua to leadership, the transitional event of inheritance or succession (Deut. 34:9-12).
Those who reject Sutton's thesis need to present an alternative model of the Pentateuch, one which fits it better, and one which also fits the Ten Commandments better, since they are also structured in terms of the five-point model: 1-5 and 6-10. Critics need to pay attention that old political aphorism: "You can't beat something with nothing." It is not enough to mumble that "Sutton's book tries to prove too much," or "There are lots of different models in the Bible." There are indeed lots of proposed biblical models, among them the Trinity, the seven-day week, and the biblical covenant model.(23) But when we come to the question of God's formal judicial relationships with men, we always come to the covenant. It is a five-point structure. Accept no substitutes!
The Five Levitical Sacrifices Most Christians have trouble remembering the required sacrifices of Leviticus. When people have difficulty remembering something, it is usually because they have no handle, no model by which to classify what appear to be unconnected facts.(24) This has been the problem with the five Levitical sacrifices.
Five sacrifices. "Oh, no," moan the critics. "Here it comes. He's going to argue that they conform to Sutton's five-point covenant model." Exactly!
1. The Whole Burnt Offering (Lev. 1)
This offering had to be completely consumed on God's altar, except for the hide, which belonged to the officiating priest (Lev. 7:8). None of the food portion could be retained, either by the priest or the donor. The animal had to be perfect: without blemish. The Hebrew word olaw, "burning," means "going up," as in smoke. It was a holocaust. Hartley calls this the main sacrifice under the Mosaic sacrificial system.(25) "As an atoning sacrifice the whole offering was offered not so much for specific sins but for the basic sinfulness of each person and the society as a whole."(26) The entire offering went to God, a symbol of the total sacrifice required by God of every man.(27)
There was a strict law for the priests: "And the fire upon the altar shall be burning in it; it shall not be put out: and the priest shall burn wood on it every morning, and lay the burnt offering in order upon it; and he shall burn thereon the fat of the peace offerings. The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar; it shall never go out" (Lev. 6:12-13). Why so strict? Because this fire testified to the nature of God. The Book of Hebrews calls God a consuming fire (Heb. 12:29). This is the God who must be feared above all other gods, all other fears. This is the God who consumes sacrifices on His altar.
This transcendent God is an immanent God. He meets men at His altar. If men fail to offer an appropriate sacrifice, God will consume them with fire. This is the presence of God in fiery judgment. "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there" (Ps. 139:7-8). This is a sovereign God: transcendent and immanent.
2. The Grain Offering (Lev. 2)
The King James Version has this as a meat offering. This is incorrect. It was a grain offering. There are two keys to understanding this offering. First, it had to be of unleavened grain (Lev. 2:4, 11). Second, it was required when Aaron was anointed high priest (Lev. 6:20). Commentators presume that this sacrifice was required also at the anointings of subsequent high priests.
First, the requirement of unleavened grain points back to the exodus. The Passover mandated unleavened bread, too. This was God's memorial of His deliverance of His people out of bondage. They were to bring none of Egypt's leaven out of Egypt or into the Promised Land. This sacrifice pointed back to what Kline identifies as the historical prologue of the exodus: God's sovereign acts in history to deliver His people.(28) This means that this grain sacrifice is linked to point two of the covenant: historical prologue.
Second, the requirement that the sons of Aaron offer this sacrifice at the anointing of the high priest points to ecclesiastical hierarchy. The high priest was the most important officer in Israel. He met God in the holy of holies once a year. He was the primary mediator between God and Israel. This also points to point two: hierarchy/representation.
3. The Peace Offering (Lev. 3)
This offering was voluntary. It was not part of the system of atonement. Hartley translates it the offering of well-being. So does Milgrom.(29) There were three types of peace offerings: praise offering (Lev. 2:15), vow (votive) offering (Lev. 7:16), and freewill offering (Lev. 7:16). Hartley writes: "A primary aim of this sacrifice is for the offerer and his family or class, including invited guests, to eat the meat returned to them in a festive meal."(30)
The significant judicial fact of this offering was its openness. The offerer joined in a meal with God and his family. This indicates that the judicial barriers that always exist between God and sinful man were reduced. The participants' sins had already been dealt with judicially by another sacrifice. The sacrifice of well-being was a communion meal. The meal's participants were visibly identified as holy before God, set apart to praise Him and rejoice in His grace. The boundaries separating the offerer and this sacrifice were minimal compared to the boundaries around the other offerings. The offerer received back most of the offering. This points to point three of the covenant: ethics/boundaries.
4. The Purification Offering (Lev. 4-5:13)
This is called the sin offering in the King James Version. This was the sacrifice governing unintentional sins committed by the high priest, the civil ruler, the congregation as a whole, or individuals. "It describes behavior that violates the community's standards."(31) Without the purification offering, the whole community was endangered. These sacrifices were required to avoid God's negative sanctions in history. They were offered to escape "a religious judgment on deviant behavior."(32) Hartley cites a 1989 article by A. Marx, who argued that this sacrifice was required on three formal occasions: the investiture of Levites (Num. 8:1-36); the ordination of Aaron (Lev. 8:1-36; Ex. 29:1-37), and the consecration of the altar (Lev. 8:11, 15; Ex. 29:36-37). The Nazarite had to make a purification offering at the termination of his vow (Num. 6:13-20).(33)
David's concern is illustrative: "Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression" (Ps. 19:12-13). In other words, if we are careful about the small sins, we will not fall into the great ones. If the high priest, the civil ruler, the whole congregation, and the individual all take such precautions, then God's wrath will not fall on Israel.
One sin that had to be dealt with by means of the purification offering was the false oath. "And if a soul sin, and hear the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether he hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity" (Lev. 5:1). Also, "if a soul swear, pronouncing with his lips to do evil, or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath, and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty in one of these" (Lev. 5:4). Here is the penalty: "And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin" (Lev. 5:6). This is a trespass offering, or reparation offering (point five), but in the case of false oaths heard in secret or pronounced in ignorance, it is the judicial equivalent of the purification offering: "a sin offering." Point four of the biblical covenant model deals with oaths: the formal invoking of God's negative sanctions, the self-maledictory oath. Such an oath calls down upon the oath-taker God's curses, should the oath-taker break the law of the covenant.
The law of purification stated that the vessels in which the animal's remains were cooked had to be broken (clay pots) or thoroughly scourged (metal utensils) (Lev. 6:28). Again, the ritual concern is judgment. The concern, therefore, is sanctions: point four of the biblical covenant model.
5. The Reparation Offering (Lev. 5:14-6:7)(34)
This is called the trespass offering in the King James Version. This sacrifice was required in cases of theft: an illegal appropriation of another man's inheritance, a violation of the tenth commandment (point five). A man uses deception to gain ownership of another man's goods. Then he lies to the victim and the civil authorities. To restore the legal relationship after the criminal voluntarily confesses the crime and the two false oaths, he must pay the victim the value of the item stolen plus a 20 percent penalty (Lev. 6:5).(35) He also has to offer a ram as a trespass offering to make atonement (Lev. 6:6-7).
There should be no confusion about what is involved in the sacrifice. First, the lost inheritance is restored to the victim, plus an extra one-fifth. The judicial relationship between the victim and the criminal is thereby restored, making it possible to gain the advantages of social cooperation. Second, God is repaid because of the criminal's false oath in civil court. The criminal avoids being cut off by God: disinheritance. The goal is continuity: survival and covenantal prosperity in history. This is point five of the biblical covenant model: succession.
Conclusion The requirement that God's people be holy is still in force. There will never be an escape from this requirement. It is eternal. To understand at least some of the implications of this ethical requirement -- point three of the biblical covenant model -- Christians need to understand the Book of Leviticus. They need to understand that it is a very practical book, many of whose laws still have valid applications in modern society. We ignore this book at our peril.
The Pentateuch is itself revelatory of the five-point structure of God's covenant. My economic commentary on the Pentateuch is therefore a commentary on a covenant. I call it the dominion covenant, for it is the God-given, God-required assignment to mankind to exercise dominion and subdue the earth that defines mankind's task as the only creature who images God the Creator (Gen. 1:26-28).
Footnotes:
1. The first chapter was published in the Chalcedon Report in May, 1973.
2. Ray R. Sutton, That You May Prosper: Dominion By Covenant (2nd ed.; Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992).
3. I am not saying, nor have I ever implied, that this five-point model is the only model or structure in Scripture. The seven-day week model, the three-fold Trinitarian model, and other numeric and non-numeric models are valid and have their place in a comprehensive, integrated biblical hermeneutic. What I am saying is this: the five-point covenant model is the model for covenants, i.e., judicial bonds that are lawfully established by a self-maledictory oath under God. There are four -- and only four -- such covenants: personal, ecclesiastical, family, and civil.
4. David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Ft. Worth, Texas: Dominion Press, 1987).
5. See Appendix K, below: "Critics of the Five-Point Covenant Model."
6. Meredith G. Kline, Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy: Studies and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1963), pp. 52-61: "Historical Prologue: Covenant History, 1:6-4:49."
7. This is what Kline does with his theory of the Mosaic Covenant as an intrusion -- an ethical discontinuity -- that pointed to God's final judgment, therefore (???) having no judicial relevance in the New Covenant era. Specifically, it is the covenant's negative sanctions, revealed in the imprecatory psalms, that led to Kline's neo-dispensational ethical theory. See Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1972), pp. 161-67. Kline argues that God's sanctions in history today are covenantally unpredictable. Kline, "Comments on an Old-New Error," Westminster Theological Journal, XLI (Fall 1978), p. 184.
8. This is why pietists and dispensationalists of all kinds, including Kline's followers, are so hostile to theonomy. It is not just because of theonomy's theology of the covenant but also because of its necessary application: the construction a revelational social theory based on God's corporate sanctions in history and theonomy's demand that the State impose the Mosaic civil sanctions. This is an affront to the modern State and modern politics, and Protestant pietists have had an operational alliance with modern politics for over three centuries based on Roger Williams' theory of pluralism and the secular State. On this alliance, see Gary North, Political Polytheism: The Myth of Pluralism (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1989).
9. Gary North, Moses and Pharaoh: Dominion Religion vs. Power Religion (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1985).
10. Gary North, The Sinai Strategy: Economics and the Ten Commandments (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1986), Preface.
11. Ibid., ch. 3.
12. I conclude that the Lutherans' structuring of the Ten Commandments is incorrect. The fifth commandment is "Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy says may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee." This is a law of inheritance: point five.
13. Ibid., ch. 8.
14. Gary North, Inherit the Earth: Biblical Blueprints for Economics (Ft. Worth, Texas: Dominion Press, 1987), ch. 3.
15. Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1979), p. 30.
16. The Open Bible: Expanded Edition (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 1983), p. 95.
17. Ibid., p. 96.
18. R. K. Harrison, Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1980), p. 14.
19. Jacob Milgrom, "The Biblical Diet Laws as an Ethical System: Food and Faith," Interpretation, XVII (1963), p. 295.
20. Open Bible, p. 127.
21. Ibid., p. 128.
22. Ibid., p. 171.
23. In my Publisher's Preface to Sutton's 1987 first edition, I wrote: ". . . the author has discovered the key above all other keys to interpreting the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. . . " (xi). But what about the doctrine of God? It is included in the first point of the biblical covenant model. The covenant model is more comprehensive than the doctrine of God. It includes hierarchy -- God> man> creation -- law, sanctions, and eschatology. What about the doctrine of the Trinity? What about creation? The Trinity and the doctrine of the Creator-creature distinction (creation) are guiding presuppositions of orthodoxy, as reflected in the creeds. Nevertheless, the Trinitarian doctrine of God, like the doctrine of creation, appears in very few texts in the Bible. The Trinity is a doctrine derived from a comparative handful of texts in the New Testament. In contrast, the covenant structure is found in hundreds of texts and even whole books of the Bible, including Leviticus. If you are trying to interpret a large number of texts in the Bible, the texts that are explicitly structured by the covenant vastly outnumber the texts explicitly structured by the Trinity or the creation. The traditional Christian exegetical exercise called "find the implied but camouflaged Trinity in the Old Tesatament," is far more difficult and far less persuasive than "find the implied or explicit covenant model in the Old Testament."
24. This is why military history is so demanding, and why so few academic historians work in the field.
25. John E. Hartley, Leviticus, vol. 4 of the Word Bible Commentary (Dallas, Texas: Word Books, 1992), p. 17.
26. Ibid., p. 18.
27. Ibid., p. 24.
28. Kline, Structure of Biblical Authority, p. 53.
29. Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, vol. 3 of The Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1991), p. 217.
30. Hartley, Leviticus, p. 38.
31. Ibid., p. 55.
32. Idem.
33. Ibid., p. 56.
34. Ibid., pp. 72-86.
35. Had he not confessed, and had he been convicted, the penalty was at least two-fold restitution.
If you are interested in receiving Dr. North's FREE monthly e-mail newsletter send an e-mail to:
If this book helps you gain a new understanding of the Bible, please consider sending a small donation to the Institute for Christian Economics, P.O. Box 8000, Tyler, TX 75711. You may also want to buy a printed version of this book, if it is still in print. Contact ICE to find out.