CONCLUSION And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind. For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Luke 12:29-34).
This is the same economic message that Jesus offered in the Sermon on the Mount. "Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6:31-33).
This message runs counter to man's fallen nature. Man finds himself in a cursed world. God cursed the ground in response to Adam's sin. He also cursed Adam's work (Gen. 3:17-19). Fallen man battles nature to secure his daily bread. The war between man and nature is economic. Man seeks to squeeze productivity out of nature.
Free market capitalism is the most successful method in history for squeezing productivity out of nature. It is mankind's most successful means for reducing the economic effects of God's curse on the ground. Air conditioning today overcomes the sweat on most industrial men's brows. Farmers ride in air conditioned tractors. The question is: Can a society maintain its commitment to the curse-reducing free market social order when Christian faith wanes? Will God allow the curse of the ground to be progressively reduced in a social order that denies God?
The modern humanistic economist argues that the free market social order is autonomous. It does not rest on religious presuppositions. It brings blessings to every society that embraces it, irrespective of the nation's theology. In short, "My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth" (Deut. 8:17a). This, too, is a theology: the theology of autonomous man.
The Accumulation of Treasure Jesus said that covenant-keepers have God on their side in the battle against scarcity. They will not starve. God will provide whatever His servants require to accomplish their God-assigned tasks. God will not abandon them.
But there is another side to this promise. God requires them to forego the quest for earthly treasure. They must not become caught up in the endless quest for more. Such a quest reveals men's lack of faith in God. It reveals their worship of mammon: the god of "more for me in history."(1)
Men seek protection from the unpredictable hazards and burdens of life. This is legitimate: an appropriate response to God's curse of the ground. The question is: Where should men seek this protection? In God or in their possessions? Where are men's economic reserves? In God or in gold? Life is a challenge because it is unpredictable and because sin is loose in the world. To accumulate sufficient gold to match the level of reserves offered free of charge by God, a covenant-keeper would have to accumulate a mountain of gold. Even this would not be sufficient, for gold can be stolen. Nature cannot supply sufficient reserves to match the reserves promised by God. Furthermore, nature drives a very hard bargain. "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" (Mark 8:36).(2)
Treasure is a good thing. Jesus said repeatedly that covenant-keepers are supposed to amass it. But located where? In heaven or on earth?
Most men seek earthly treasure. This quest is a huge mistake, Jesus told His disciples. Men should seek heavenly treasure. He told them that God was going to give them the kingdom. They were therefore not to fear. Fear what? The world, with all of its shortages. "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind."(3)
The Gospel of Luke presents Jesus as a harsh critic of earthly riches. The same Jesus appears in the other Gospels, but Luke's Gospel presents events in the ministry of Jesus that focus on the snares and cares of riches.(4) It should be obvious to anyone who reads Luke carefully that the author was highly suspicious of riches. In this respect, he faithfully followed the teaching of Jesus.
How does a God-fearing person accumulate treasure in heaven? By surrendering treasure in history. Jesus told the rich young ruler, "Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" (Luke 12:33-34).(5) There is a currency exchange market in history where covenant-keepers (though not covenant-breakers) can buy eternal treasure. They can build up treasure that they will collect beyond the grave. It takes great faith to believe this. Such faith is available only as a gift from God, just as eternal life is available only as a gift from God. Covenant-keepers must learn to trust God for everything that they need in this life, as well as for their access to eternal life. God monitors their faith in His promise of eternal life by viewing their responses to His promises regarding temporal life.
Trusting God Jesus taught His disciples that they were supposed to trust only in God for everything important in this life. They could no longer trust their own families. "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law" (Luke 12:51-53). They could not trust the State, either. "But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake" (Luke 21:12). Finally, they could not trust money. "No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon" (Luke 16:13).(6) They would have to trust God. God knew their needs, and He would not abandon them.(7)
Jesus in this passage assured them that God would provide them with the basics: food, shelter, and clothing. What about homes? What about steady employment? Jesus did not mention these. Yet a steady job and a place to call home have been among the most desired assets in history. A piece of ground with trees and vines had eschatological implications for Israel. "But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it" (Micah 4:1-4). The idea of coming home is basic to eschatology (Rev. 21; 22). It is also basic to building a civilization.
How can a people exercise dominion as wandering nomads? Only marginally. But Jesus had no home. "And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Luke 9:58). He did not live long enough to buy one. He called His disciples to a life of wandering.(8) He knew that there was no hope for Old Covenant Israel.(9) Nowhere in Scripture is this made any clearer than in Luke's Gospel. In a passage that appears only in Luke, we read: "And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:20-24). The disciples could trust God to deliver the church from this eschatological event for Israel, which He did. Jesus told His followers that bad days lay ahead for national Israel, but not for the church. The persecution of the church would be a temporary phenomenon. The destruction of Old Covenant Israel would be permanent.(10)
Jesus warned His disciples not to put their faith in anything rooted in history. This is always good advice, but especially in His era. History was about to take an unexpected turn. A new world order was coming into existence through Christ's ministry: the fifth and final kingdom prophesied by Daniel. "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever" (Dan. 2:44). Jesus promised that God would soon give this kingdom to the disciples and their covenantal heirs. It would be taken from the Jews, Jesus had told the Pharisees. "Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Matt. 21:43).
Jesus told His disciples that history is transformed by eternity. The way for covenant-keepers to shape history is to abandon any faith in history as the source of permanence. His people must be in history, but they must not be of history. It took great faith to believe this message. It took even greater faith to act in terms of it. It still does.
The kingdom of God is visibly manifested in history. What will be true in eternity is reflected in history. As surely as the creation testifies to the Creator,(11) so will history progressively testify to the final victory of Jesus Christ in eternity. Christ's victory at the end of time will not be a great reversal of His covenantal representatives' failure in history. This is because His victory was attained in history (Matt. 28:18-20), reversing Satan's victory over Adam, which also took place in history. The war for eternity is conducted primarily in history.
There are many promises in the Bible that deal with the positive transformation of civilization. Some of these involve inheritance, which is the fifth point of the biblical covenant model.(12)
What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose. His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth (Ps. 25:12-13).
For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth (Ps. 37:9).
But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Ps. 37:11).
Jesus on the Covenant's Sanctions
Jesus reaffirmed this promise in the Sermon on the Mount. "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth" (Matt. 5:5). In the Mosaic Covenant, this inheritance was promised by God as a blessing in response to men's corporate covenantal obedience to His Bible-revealed law. "And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe and to do all his commandments which I command thee this day, that the LORD thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth: And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God" (Deut. 28:1-2).
Jesus did not cite this passage, nor did He discuss the relationship between corporate obedience and external wealth. He rejected tangible wealth as an ideal. This requires an explanation. Did He break with the Old Covenant law and its divine sanctions in history? If so, why did He say that the meek would inherit the earth? That was an Old Covenant promise. But if He had not broken with the Old Covenant, why did He reject the ideal of great wealth as a blessing of God and therefore a tool of dominion in history?
I offer two answers. First, Jesus' doctrine of eternal sanctions significantly modified the Old Covenant. The Old Testament had offered no doctrine of eternal sanctions. Reaping and sowing were exclusively historical. Eliphaz testified to Job, "Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same" (Job 4:8). The Old Covenant's relationship between plowing and reaping was visible and therefore historical. More than this: it was exclusively historical. The biblical doctrine of eternal sanctions was introduced by Jesus. Jesus warned of hell for covenant-breakers who live in luxury in this life, and offered hope of heaven to covenant-keepers who live in poverty.(13) Paul subsequently applied the reap-sow relationship to history-eternity. "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting" (Gal. 6:7-8).
Second, Jesus emphasized the addictive power of riches. The worship of mammon is the worship of "more for me in history." Men can never attain enough for themselves when they pursue the accumulation of more. They can never gain peace when they want more. Paul's warning was an extension of Jesus' teaching. "But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. 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. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses" (I Tim. 6:6-12).
Paul said he had learned to be content with whatever his circumstances were. "Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need" (Phil. 4:11-12). This contented state of mind is given by God to very few people. This same resting in faith is what Jesus recommended. It is the essence of trusting God.
Wealth and Dominion In the Mosaic Covenant, national wealth was a tool of God's dominion. "And the LORD shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers to give thee. The LORD shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow. And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them" (Deut. 28:11-13).
Jesus never referred to this passage, nor did He recommend anything like this economic approach to dominion. He was launching a new organization, the church. He said that the church was about to inherit God's kingdom. Did His silence on the economic promises of God's covenantal law mean that the kingdom of God would be stripped of economic success in the New Testament era? To answer this, we must consider when and where His disciples lived.
The Old Covenant ended in A.D. 70. Did this include the Old Covenant's command to exercise dominion? On the contrary: "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen" (Matt. 28:18-20). What are the tools of dominion? God's Bible-revealed law.(14) To these laws are attached supernatural corporate sanctions. Positive corporate sanctions include an increase in national wealth. This does not mean that these judicial tools are sufficient. They are not. Grace is required to empower covenant-keepers to use the tool of biblical law effectively.
Did Jesus announce a new way to dominion? To the disciples, He did. This new way is sacrificial economic service to God. A man must be rich toward God. "But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God" (Luke 12:20-21).(15) It involves charity.(16) "Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth" (Luke 12:33). But does the recommendation of voluntary poverty apply to all of Jesus' disciples throughout history? The church has always said no. Sects and monastic orders have occasionally adopted the lifestyle recommended to the apostles, but these have always been small fringe groups. In the case of medieval monastic orders, they kept getting rich because of their thrift and discipline. This led to a series of monastic reform movements that called the members back to the founders' vows of poverty. Christianity has the effect of increasing the wealth of its adherents as they bring themselves progressively under the discipline of Christ.
Jesus called the apostles into missionary service.(17) Not every person is called to be a missionary. Some people are called to support missionaries financially. This usually requires a stream of income. A stream of income requires a job or investment capital. Investment capital is accumulated wealth.
Missions and Wealth Middle-class comfort is the biblical economic ideal. "Remove far from me vanity and lies: give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me: Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain" (Prov. 30:8-9).
The means for the world's masses to achieve middle-class wealth is steady compound economic growth over centuries. Until the advent of free market capitalism in the Christian West, there was no known way to achieve long-term economic growth. The concept of permanent economic growth did not exist prior to the seventeenth century.
Missionaries bring the gospel, along with its rules against theft, covetousness, and envy. This is the first step historically on the pathway to permanent middle-class wealth for the masses of a society. It took seventeen centuries for this aspect of the gospel to become institutionalized.
As part of the church's initial missionary venture, Jesus called on his disciples to sell their goods and give to the poor. I argue that this command was historically conditioned. It is not a universal command. The church has assumed this through most of its history.
Jesus did not tell His disciples to burn their goods and follow Him. He told them to sell their goods, give the money to the poor, and follow Him. This raises a key question regarding the universal application of this command: How is it possible for all of Jesus' followers to obey it as their numbers increase through time? It would be impossible for all rich men to follow Jesus' command to sell their goods and give to the poor. Sellers need buyers. The primary wealth-defining asset of the rich is their capital. When they sell their capital, they transfer the primary source of their income to the buyers. The buyers then become rich: owners of future income streams. Someone will own these income streams. Therefore, somebody in every society will always be rich. The rich we will always have with us.
This raises a crucial eschatological question. Which group, covenant-keepers or covenant-breakers, will control most of the world's wealth when Christ comes in final judgment? The Bible is clear on this point: covenant-keepers. "For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth" (Ps. 37:9). But covenant-keepers cannot inherit the earth if, one by one, they sell their capital to covenant-breakers and give their money to the poor, thereby disinheriting their children. Their lawful inheritance would be transferred to covenant-breakers. Wealth would then compound for covenant-breakers. The wealth of the righteous would flow to sinners. This is contrary to Scripture. "A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just" (Prov. 13:22). Conclusion: Jesus did not intend for this command to become permanent.
Jesus gave this command to a small group. He called them a little flock. This command makes less and less sense, the larger the flock becomes. The Great Commission is the great missionary venture. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19-20a). The stated goal is to convert all nations and bring them to comprehensive obedience to God.(18) But when this goal is achieved, covenant-keepers would have to sell their goods to other covenant-keepers. This would make the command impossible for everyone to obey.
This command had to be temporary. The more successful the Christian missionary venture is, the less relevant this command becomes. As the proportion of Christians rises in the population, it becomes increasingly difficult for Christians to obey the command. As the kingdom of God in history progressively approaches the ideal of the kingdom of God in eternity, the number of potential covenant-breaking buyers decreases in relation to potential covenant-keeping sellers.
The command for Christians to decapitalize themselves for the sake of the poor is not universal. It was a temporary strategy for the first wave of missionary activity. Its primary goal was to screen out the less committed followers of Jesus. Its primary goal was not to help large numbers of poor people. There were not a sufficient number of disciples to help large numbers of poor people.
The most effective way to help the poor, long term, is to enable them to increase their productivity. With greater productivity, they will earn larger incomes. For the poor, the beneficial effects of charity are individual and temporary. To raise the largest number of people out of poverty, the richest twenty percent of the population must invest in tools that the poor can use to increase their productivity. This is free market capitalism's way to greater per capita wealth: for both the rich and the poor.(19)
Success and Success Indicators Great wealth is pictured in Luke's Gospel as a source of great cares. It is pictured in Matthew as deceitful (Matt. 13:22). Jesus made it clear that the care and feeding of earthly riches is a spiritually risky calling. Does this mean that Christians should never seek earthly riches? Yes. Does it mean that no Christian should ever get rich? No. Becoming rich and seeking to become rich can be two different things, although they seldom are. A person may inherit a fortune. He may discover some way to please customers, who pay him well to keep on pleasing them. He may be the owner of land on which treasure is discovered. But he is not to seek great wealth. Christ was clear about this.
Nevertheless, the quest for riches motivates many men. They seek ways to gain wealth by serving men better. Their goal is not to serve men for the sake of serving them. It is to serve them in order to get paid. He who seeks something of value from another person usually must offer something of value to him in exchange. He must appeal to the other person's self-interest. This view of wealth accumulation was made famous in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations (1776). In contrast, Jesus told the Pharisee who held the feast for his peers on the sabbath that this was not the way to act. Instead, He said, invite those who are not able to repay you, and thereby gain a reward in eternity (Luke 14:14).(20)
Jesus taught that earthly wealth should be given away, for this is the way of heavenly wealth accumulation. But it is also the way of wealth accumulation in history. "There is [he] that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is [he] that withholdeth more than is meet [fit], but it tendeth to poverty. The liberal soul shall be made fat: and he that watereth shall be watered also himself" (Prov. 11:24-25). The question is: How much of a Christian's earthly wealth should he give away? At least ten percent, Jesus taught.(21) Beyond this, Jesus gave no universal answer. What appears to be a universal answer in this passage is an illusion, as we shall see.
Two separate allocation issues are involved in the practice of accumulating riches. The first is the issue of earthly wealth vs. heavenly wealth. This is the issue that Jesus dealt with continually. The second is the issue of accumulating either success or success indicators. The second issue is not well understood. It is possible to gain success indicators and reap failure. This error in choosing which to pursue is encapsulated in Jesus' account of the final judgment: "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Matt. 7:22-23). Another New Testament example: casting out demons was a publicly visible activity. It was thought to indicate spiritual success. The disciples surely thought it was. "After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come. . . . And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name" (Luke 10:1, 17). Jesus warned them that this was not enough. "Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven" (Luke 10:20).
The pursuit of an economic success indicator rather than improving the level of service that produces economic success is spiritually suicidal. "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God" (Acts 8:18-21).
The Temptation of Substitution
Men are tempted to substitute the pursuit of success indicators rather than actual success, which is based on effective service. A student may pursue high grades at the expense of learning. He masters the techniques of cramming for exams, but he does not spend enough time to internalize the material, making it part of his thinking, which is what the goal of education is. Worse; he may cheat to get better grades. A politician may pursue votes rather than pursuing justice. But the proper goal of civil government is justice. Worse; he may take bribes to fill up his campaign fund. A businessman may pursue money at the expense of producing a better product or service, but the goal of business is to serve consumers. Worse; he may cheat his customers in order to increase his profits. There is always tension between success and visible success indicators. Sometimes this temptation moves from bad motivation to bad ethics.
Jesus told His followers to extend His kingdom. He made it clear that the success indicator of great wealth is not to be substituted for faithful service. The Old Covenant had connected the success indicator of national riches with national covenantal obedience, i.e., faithful service to God. Jesus never mentioned this relationship. He kept warning His followers that there is more to success in life than riches. Riches, in fact, are a constant threat to success because they are so widely defined as success.
Jesus knew men's hearts. He knew how easily that men can be sidetracked from their individual dominion tasks by the pursuit of success indicators. His doctrine of final sanctions announced a new success indicator: heavenly treasure. The Old Covenant had not mentioned final sanctions: heaven and hell. Jesus shifted the discussion of success indicators from history to eternity. He shifted the discussion of wealth from history to eternity. He did not abandon the idea of dominion in history. He did not abandon the promise of earthly inheritance.(22) What He did was to announce a new success indicator: heavenly treasure.
Jesus did not revoke the Old Covenant's doctrine of kingdom inheritance. Inheritance is an inescapable concept. It is never a question of inheritance vs. no inheritance. It is always a question of whose inheritance. Will Satan inherit in history, or will Christ? Because Satan and Christ dwell in a realm beyond history, this is another way of asking: Will Satan's representative agents inherit world civilization, or will Christ's? Jesus taught that those who are meek before God will inherit. This is what the Old Covenant had also taught. Jesus did not break with the Old Covenant on this point.
Covenant-keepers are to extend God's kingdom in history. As with any corporate project, there are personal success indicators. What is unique about the personal success indicators in this corporate project is this: they constitute the actual successes. Paul wrote: "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law" (Gal. 5:22-23). Peter wrote: "And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (II Peter 1:5-11).
Wealth Exchange: Temporal vs. Eternal God places a price tag on men's possession of earthly capital: their non-attainment of equivalent eternal capital. This exchange system is inescapable. Jesus told His disciples to choose eternal treasure, which is safe, in preference to temporal treasure, which is not safe. Eternal treasure is stored where thieves cannot break in. We might also say that its market price cannot fall.
Price theory teaches that the continuing cost of owning item A is forfeiting the use of item B, which the owner could buy with the money he could gain by selling item A. Day by day, the owner of item A does without item B. The economist says that item B is the next highest item on the owner's value scale. Jesus said that the heavenly wealth is worth more than temporal wealth. So, by hanging on to temporal -- and therefore temporary -- wealth, a covenant-keeper is forfeiting permanent ownership of a higher value asset. He is sacrificing the greater for the sake of the lesser. This is unwise, Jesus said.
Is there any legitimate kingdom function for great temporal wealth? Yes. It provides an income stream that can be used to fund kingdom projects. The income generated by the asset is exchanged piecemeal for eternal wealth. Instead of a one-time exchange, the owner of a capital asset retains ownership for the sake of future kingdom projects. The risk here is that the owner may lose his enthusiasm for funding kingdom projects. He may become addicted to the income generated by his capital. Or his heirs may not share his commitment.
A parent accumulates wealth for his children and grandchildren. "A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children's children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just" (Prov. 13:22). But he must also train his heirs in the proper administration of the inheritance. "An inheritance may be gotten hastily at the beginning; but the end thereof shall not be blessed" (Prov. 20:21). The inheritance is supposed to enable the heirs to continue building God's kingdom. So, capital can sometimes remain a tool of dominion. But very few large family inheritances survive long term, and fewer still continue to finance God's kingdom. Either the inheritance is dissipated or else the faith of the heirs changes. To keep an inheritance intact, the heirs must remain productive. This is rare. The other alternative is primogeniture: eldest son inherits everything. This is unbiblical. Younger sons should inherit their portion. "If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his" (Deut. 21:15-17).
The money will be spent eventually. While it is under the control of a covenant-keeper, he can allocate it according to God's standards, as he understands them. He cannot be sure how it will be allocated after he dies. He is responsible before God while he is still legally in control. Jesus taught that men should make effective use of their wealth while they still can. This means an exchange of temporal wealth for eternal wealth.
Capital Accumulation and Poverty Capitalism is a system of private ownership that allows people to save and invest. They surrender money -- the most marketable commodity -- to buy income-generating assets. A capital asset is a tool used by non-owners, including workers, to generate future income, which is why it can generate future income for its owner. With better tools, workers improve their productivity and therefore raise their income.
Free market capitalism is the only historically tested way to increase wealth for all and great wealth for a few. No other economic arrangement has ever achieved compound per capita economic growth for a period of over two centuries. We have learned that if a society does not offer the legal possibility of great wealth for a few people, it cannot achieve middle-class comfort for most people.
In modern society, about twenty percent of a nation's population owns seventy-five to eighty-five percent of the wealth. This is irrespective of tax laws and other State action. This statistical fact is variously known as Pareto's law or Pareto's rule or the 20-80 rule.(23) This fact presents Christian theologians and social theorists with a major dilemma. So far, the only demonstrated way for a society to achieve the Bible's economic goal of middle-class wealth for a large majority of people is its adoption of free market capitalism. This goal is achieved through personally self-interested actions that are motivated by the quest for increased wealth. This seems incompatible with Jesus' recommended way of righteousness for covenant-keepers. If a society seeks to achieve the blessings of Proverb 30:8-9, how can it do this without violating Jesus' rule against the quest for individual wealth accumulation? If the answer is, "it can't," then this seems to require the exclusion of Christians from entering the ranks of the rich. But this would close off the spread of the gospel to twenty percent of the nation's population: the rich, who own eighty percent of the wealth.
If all Christians should ever decide to obey Jesus' command about selling their goods and giving the money to the poor, the world's primary wealth-owners could never be Christians. Either rich Christians would have to become poor, or else poor Christians could never become rich. But power and influence follow wealth. This means that in a world of wealth-abandoning Christians, covenant-breakers would permanently dominate law-making. They would support non-Christian politicians and non-biblical laws. That which is generally the case today in politics would become permanent. How could covenant-keepers ever overcome the systematic resistance of the rich in the extension of God's kingdom in history?
Jesus said that rich men only rarely enter God's kingdom. Will this be true throughout history? If Jesus' repeated warnings against wealth accumulation are valid for all times and all places, then Christians face a dilemma: either Pareto's 20-80 income distribution rule is temporary or else Christians must fail in their earthly efforts to replace Satan's kingdom with God's.
Eschatology
Here, we come to eschatology. Sooner or later, we must. Eschatology matters. It is part of the biblical covenant model.(24) There are three views: premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism. They all refer to the timing of the bodily return of Jesus Christ: before Jesus' in-person earthly victory era (premillennialism), after Satan's kingdom victory era (amillennialism), or after Christianity's earthly victory era (postmillennialism). Each view of the future of God's kingdom on earth has specific approaches to social theory. These approaches are not compatible because their underlying eschatologies are not compatible.(25)
Premillennialism is silent about the details of Christ's millennial reign after His bodily return. All we are told is that prior to Christ's bodily return to set up a one-world civil government, Christianity will fail to overcome anti-Christianity's control of this world. Amillennialism teaches that Christians will not defeat non-Christians in their competition to extend their respective kingdoms in history. Both of these eschatological views are consistent with Jesus' command to surrender earthly wealth today for eternal wealth. The rich will reject the gospel anyway. So, Christians must not seek or expect great wealth.
Because premillennialists and amillennialists do not discuss biblical economic theory, they do not tell us whether Christians should expect poverty or middle-class living. They also do not discuss Pareto's rule of income distribution. Then what do they preach regarding economic success? Premillennial and amillennial pastors in the West do not preach a message of perpetual poverty, either as an ideal or an eschatological necessity. Most of them may preach political and cultural impotence, but they do not preach poverty as an ideal. They may tell their followers to be content with political and cultural impotence, but they do not tell them to be content with poverty. Pastors do not want their own income to be dependent on the donations of poor people.
Postmillennialism teaches that the Great Commission will be successful in history.(26) Jesus Christ will exercise worldwide dominion through the cultural and institutional success of His people prior to His second coming.(27) So, postmillennialism must implicitly assume either 1) that Pareto's 20-80 wealth distribution phenomenon is temporary, or 2) that covenant-keepers will eventually gain sufficient spiritual wisdom and self-control to enable them to accumulate tangible wealth safely. How will this wealth accumulation take place? First, the rich will be brought to saving faith. Second, covenantal faithfulness will produce personal riches. The poor will become less poor because of capital accumulation by covenant-keepers.(28)
Should postmillennialists accept the conclusion that Jesus' warnings against owning great wealth were temporary? Were these warnings confined to His day, when He was calling His followers into missionary service? Were these warnings confined to missionary periods, before the gospel takes root in a targeted society?(29) I see no alternative: the answer to all three questions is yes. Two facts have led me to this conclusion. First, postmillennialism forecasts the successful spread of the gospel worldwide, which will be followed by the transformation of civilization, including long-term per capita economic growth. When a society obeys God's law, men's individual efforts will prosper. Postmillennialism implies that no income group is permanently beyond the work of the gospel. Postmillennialism therefore implies that the eye of the needle will eventually become quite large. Second, capitalism implies that the rich we will always have with us. The biblical standard of middle-class wealth can be achieved socially, as far as we know today, only by allowing entrepreneurs to become rich -- a rich minority. My conclusion is that Jesus' warning against temporal wealth accumulation by His followers was historically grounded, i.e., temporary.
Covenant-keepers are not to seek riches without designating in advance specific kingdom goals for these hoped-for riches. They must recognize in advance that the cost of achieving any goal through riches is the accumulation of cares. They must count the cost.(30) They are not to adopt the religion of mammon: "more for me in history."
If I am incorrect about the temporary nature of Christ's command to adopt poverty for the sake of the kingdom, then my critics have a responsibility to show how it is that a society can achieve widespread middle-class wealth and also obey Christ's warning against accumulating riches, i.e., capital. If middle-class wealth is a valid goal for a Christian society, how is it that a society's only known means of attaining this goal are immoral, or at least highly dangerous to the soul? The only historically verified way for a society to attain the goal of widespread middle-class wealth is by successful entrepreneurship, coupled with thrift by the wealthiest twenty percent of the population. (Charity to the poor is added by the Bible.)
Is entrepreneurship a morally dangerous act? The answer depends on the motivation of the entrepreneur. Is he seeking to accumulate earthly riches, or is he seeking to serve consumers?
Entrepreneurship and Customer Service Free market economic theory teaches that the only predictable way for a society to increase its per capita wealth is by allowing entrepreneurs to serve consumers through open competition: entrepreneurs vs. entrepreneurs, consumers vs. consumers. Economists like to say that the consumer is sovereign. Actually, only God is sovereign. Economists should say that the consumer possesses final economic authority. Consumers determine the success or failure of entrepreneurial ventures because consumers possess the most marketable economic good: money. The consumer has a wider range of choice than producer does do because he owns money. The producer has a much narrower range of choices: ownership of specialized goods offered for sale in a narrow market. He seeks money in exchange for his goods in order to increase his range of choices. The seller of goods does not possess final economic authority except in rare cases, such as the Pharaoh during the famine (Gen. 47). Even this case is not a good example, for the Pharaoh had used the monopolistic power of the State to accumulate the grain that gave him this final economic authority.
Free market capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of property. Consumers have the dominant economic position in such a system. They have money, and once they have paid their taxes, they are not compelled by law to spend their money in any particular way. Producers must persuade consumers to buy from them. The way to wealth under capitalism is service to consumers. The successful entrepreneur increases his wealth by serving consumers more effectively than his competitors do. He may legally accumulate great personal wealth, but he can keep it only by continuing to serve consumers more efficiently than his competition. The free market system rewards consumers by allowing consumers to reward entrepreneurs.
Free market economists, who today are almost always humanists, use analytical tools that do not invoke the supernatural. For that matter, so do most Christian economists. Economists almost always present the case for capitalism in terms of service to consumers. Adam Smith began this tradition. Austrian School economists and those Chicago School economists who adopt Frank H. Knight's theory of profit(31) regard all profit as a residual. So do those Austrian School economists who accept Ludwig von Mises' theory of entrepreneurship.(32) Profits are the result of dealing successfully with market uncertainty, which by definition is statistically unpredictable, in contrast to risk.
The motivation of every entrepreneur, as with the motivation of every consumer, is the same, as far as the economist is concerned: to improve his condition. The entrepreneur seeks to exchange one set of conditions for another. The free market economist argues that a society that seeks per capita economic growth should seek ways to lower transaction costs in economic exchanges. The crucial element for lowering the transaction costs of men's voluntary exchanges is a legal system that allows open entry and competition: consumers vs. consumers, entrepreneurs vs. entrepreneurs.
Service to consumers is the free market's way for an entrepreneur to achieve his goal of gaining an above-market rate of return on his investment of time and capital, whatever his profit (if any) will be used for. The tools of economic analysis apply to all entrepreneurs, irrespective of their personal motivation. What interests the economist is the means of entrepreneurial profits: delivering superior services to consumers in an uncertain world.
Jesus said that His followers should not seek great tangible wealth. He did not say that His followers should not seek to serve consumers more efficiently. He did not say that they should not become entrepreneurs. What He warned against was mammon: the service of oneself. Mammon is the goal of "more for me in history."
The motivation of a covenant-breaking entrepreneur is "more for me in history." He serves mammon, the god of earthly self-interest. His means of achieving this goal is service to consumers. The sole motivation of the covenant-keeping entrepreneur should be service to God. He achieves his goal by serving the consumer. If he is successful, he can give more to the church (tithe) and more to the poor (offerings). But the means is the same in both cases: serving consumers.
Conclusion Because earthly treasure should be exchanged systematically for heavenly treasure, the New Testament covenant-keeper has a very difficult spiritual task -- far more difficult than the Old Covenant saint's task. He must allocate his capital between the temporal and the eternal, but he must also allocate it between the present and the future in history. This is the covenantal issue of inheritance: his own eternal inheritance and his heirs' earthly inheritance. Inheritance is an eschatological issue.
He should begin with this view of God's providence: "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind. For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you." A covenant-keeper's necessities will be taken care of by God, one way or another. This reduces his future risk. Once he intellectually and emotionally acknowledges this lower risk, he can more accurately decide what to do with his wealth. Perhaps he will decide to make an immediate exchange of temporal wealth for heavenly wealth. "Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth." This builds up his eternal inheritance. He should also begin to teach his children to be covenant-keepers, in preparation for their earthly inheritance. "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up" (Deut. 6:5-7).(33) Jesus quoted the introductory words of this passage: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself" (Luke 10:27). The disciples would have known its Old Covenant context.
Jesus modified the Old Covenant's covenantal relationship between corporate obedience and corporate wealth. He did so by adding another dimension: heaven. Wealth allocation decisions by covenant-keepers must now take into account their personal inheritance beyond the grave in heaven, as well as their covenantal heirs' inheritance beyond the grave in history. Jesus strongly recommended the laying up of personal treasure in heaven. By building up the kingdom of God in history through sacrificial giving, a covenant-keeper builds up his personal inheritance in heaven. Jesus tied the covenant-keeper's personal inheritance in heaven to the church's inheritance of the kingdom in history. He told the apostles to sell fearlessly everything that they owned. "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom."
By announcing the existence of an eternal inheritance and also the terms of exchange, Jesus modified the Mosaic Covenant's view of capital accumulation. The Mosaic Covenant had recommended the accumulation of earthly wealth, but it had presented the way to great national wealth as obedience to biblical law. Jesus recommended the accumulation of heavenly wealth at the expense of great earthly wealth. He did this at the beginning of the church's mission. He did not lay down a new economic law for Christian society that was at odds with the Mosaic law. This is because He did not lay down any new laws for Christian society. He did not need to. He was the co-author of the Mosaic law.
Footnotes:
1. Chapter 38.
2. Chapter 18.
3. Chapter 25.
4. Chapter 14.
5. Chapter 41.
6. Chapter 38.
7. Chapter 23.
8. Chapter 19.
9. Chapter 2.
10. David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Ft. Worth, Texas: Dominion Press, 1987).
11. "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Rom. 1:20).
12. Ray R. Sutton, That You May Prosper: Dominion By Covenant (2nd ed.; Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), ch. 5; Gary North, Inheritance and Dominion: An Economic Commentary on Deuteronomy, electronic edition (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1999).
13. Chapter 39.
14. Gary North, Tools of Dominion: The Case Laws of Exodus (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1990).
15. Chapter 24.
16. Chapter 10.
17. Chapter 25.
18. Kenneth L. Gentry, The Greatness of the Great Commission (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1990).
19. Chapter 15.
20. Chapter 33.
21. Chapter 22.
22. Chapter 36.
23. Chapter 12.
24. Sutton, That You May Prosper, ch. 5.
25. Gary North, Millennialism and Social Theory (Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1990).
26. Gentry, Greatness of the Great Commission.
27. Kenneth L. Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (2nd ed.; Tyler, Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1997).
28. Chapter 15.
29. Chapter 25.
30. Chapter 34.
31. Frank H. Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit (New York: Harper Torchbooks, [1921] 1965).
32. Ludwig von Mises, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1949), ch. 15.
33. North, Inheritance and Dominion, ch. 15.
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.