The Bible and Economics: Will There Be Inequality in Heaven?
"If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved…"
1 Corinthians 3:14-15
It used to be said that the goal of a fair and just society ought to be "equality of opportunity," but somewhere along the way we supplanted that noble goal for a twisted, utterly arbitrary one.
"Equality of outcome" is the new rallying cry for millions of Americans engaged in social, political and economic activity.
Loudest among them are a growing number of what I consider to be "my people"—self-described evangelicals who attend weekly church services, believe in the authority of scripture and genuinely care about finding ways to aid "the least among us." Well-intentioned and sincere, many Americans across the theological spectrum have embraced a collectivist, redistributive view of political power, in my opinion, simply because they have hurriedly connected biblical truths related to wealth, justice, helping those in needs, storing treasures in heaven, etc., with a liberal philosophy.
I believe many Christians have an aversion to free enterprise and entrepreneurial activity and have shifted to the Left on economic policy because they believe God is intolerant of inequality. They might say, "Why should I actively or even passively support an economic system that requires some end up with less than others?"
The variations in the meaning of "equality" have direct ramifications on how we think about the world around us. For example, most God-fearing Americans agree that we’re all equal in God's eyes. We're all unique individuals made in the image of our creator. This truth reminds us that we should treat each other with dignity.
You don't have to be a religious person to agree with the general moral principle in play here.
But when someone says "We’re all equal in God’s eyes," it does not follow that everyone is exactly alike. It does not mean there is no distinction between a father and a son, a boss and an employee, or a pastor and his congregation. Fathers are to instruct and love their sons, while a son is to respect and honor his father. Bosses are to treat their employees fairly, and an employee is to work for that boss to the best of his ability. According to scripture, pastors are held to a higher standard because they have been entrusted with the public teaching of God's word.
This fact of differentiation and distinction doesn't make the pastor a "better Christian." It doesn't give the boss carte blanche to intimidate and mistreat his workers. And a father who abuses or neglects his son will have to give an account of his actions one day.
Even among celestial beings, God gave different angels in heaven different roles to play, with varying degrees of reward and accolade. Lucifer was described as the most beautiful, worship-inducing creature before his monumental fall from grace. In the Old Testament, Yahweh picked a "chosen" people for His plans to redeem the human race. Jesus picked 12 disciples and chose certain ones to serve as leaders among the others.
If God were as obsessed with some vague concept of "equality" as many liberal Christians are today, He sure has had an odd way of showing it for more than 6,000 years.
But—you might say—aren't you just cherry-picking biblical concepts to try and lead a bunch of horses to drink your supply-side, free-market-flavored water? Isn't this more of the "forcing your politics into religion" stuff that everyone accused the Religious Right of doing in the 80s and 90s?
By no means. Look at the parable of the talents in Luke 19, where wealth is unevenly distributed and where the poorest of the three men is condemned for lazily squandering his opportunity. Look at Matthew 20 and the parable of the workers in the vineyard, where the landowner unevenly distributes work and compensation and silences those who complained by reminding them that it is his land, his money and his decision to do what he wants with both. Or how about the verses I cited at the beginning of this piece? Even in heaven, even among those who will spend eternity with God, we will have to give an account for the way we live and how we spend our time, energies and emotions. Not all will be treated the same.
God isn't concerned with strict equality. And inequality of wealth isn't the problem. We are the problem. Man's fallen state is the problem. Tearing down the "rich" does not help the poor, but it can hurt the poor.
We all want people to be able to provide for themselves and their families. We want those who were previously in need to be able to one day become the person who helps another struggling family.
This requires wealth creation, which in turn requires the private sector have room to flourish. If we have to "choose between unequal prosperity and shared poverty," I'll choose the former.
24 people are talking about this
Right-on!
I agree with the intent of the article, I believe God is a capitalist. It is quite evident in the scriptures, But I am a little confused, 1 Coritnthians 4:14-15 in the King James Version of the Bible does not seem to apply to this article.
I Corinthians 4:14-15
4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
4:15 For though you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
Am I missing something?
The citation is in error. It is I Corinthians 3, not 4.
We've corrected this -- thanks for your help!
Thanks for your observation. We've made the correction.
Thank you for being there. More people need to know about your sight and I will be sure to tell my friends.
Wow. Great write up!
Brilliantly put my friend! I am going to link this from my blog with a little teaser. Thank you!
Jesus said, "The poor you will always have with you". We are to help them when we have the opportunity.
The fact of their existence and continued presence presents us with the opportunity to tangibly represent the presence of Christ to the oppressed. When we alleviate their physical needs, God frees their spirits to see and hear the Good News that Jesus died and rose again so that they can be truly free, not only in space and time but also for eternity.
GOD helps those who help themselves . I think this says it all on that account .
We are all equal in God's eyes at the moment of belief in Jesus Christ, our redeemer and saviour. However, the Bible requires us to grow spiritually after that point. This is done by learning doctrine, day by day, not by doing stuff that many church-goers (believers) think is important. God ignores the so-called good works (human works). He is only interested in your spiritual growth and development to spiritually maturity - that is the whole goal of the Bible study.
By growing spiritually gradually day by day, God will bless us with various blessings (and various tests) to make our lives better and happy. Unfortunately those who believe and do nothing else will certainly go to heaven (eternal life is imparted at the moment of belief) and have a good life but also will have a chance to see the blessings they have missed, both on earth and the eschrow blessings which were specifically intended for them in heaven.
You've made good points. It should also be noted that the Bible has clearly stated "If you don't work - you don't eat. " This says a volume concerning able bodied people who sit on the side and wait for others to care for them.
When I read the question, I immediately thought of CS Lewis' "The Great Divorce."
In Heaven, it all don't--or should not--matter.
Good article. Fact of the matter is, many people have been led to believe things that are not true about what happens after death. In heaven and in hell, there will be differing rewards for the life one lived. That ALL who die without Ch
rist will go to hell, does not mean they will all receive the same punishment IN hell, death and hell is just the starting point. The kind old grandmother who rejected Christ will go to hell but will not receive the same punishment there as a mass murderer. Their punishment in hell will be proportionate to their sins in life.
Likewise, in heaven, heaven, eternal life is a "gift" of God to those who accept His Son and are born again. In heaven, there will be "rewards" for those good deeds/works done in life by all those who go to heaven. Heaven is just the start, ALL who die in Christ will go there and be blessed beyond human imagination. Others, who live productive lives in Christ, will receive above that, rewards commensurate with their deeds.
In other words, the equality of the lost and the equality of the saved is limited to the LOCATION where they spend eternity, not to the specific conditions of their eternity in those locations.
The Scriptures certainly do endorse private property, capitalistic ventures, and much else in the way of private enterprise. But it also demands of the prosperous God-fearing believers to be generoous and compassionate to the poor; it enjoins the believers to share their resources on a basis of need rathter than a basis of production on certain distinct occasions, it warns against makking certain assumptions based on the power-and-wealth status within this world. There are even speciifc instructions to the ancient Israelites to restore the field boundaries (i.e., the property rights of the susccessful and unsuccessful) to the origianl owners and/or thier heirs once every fifty (50) years: the ownership of the property but not the revenues earned form it while. This commanded action was to have been called the Year of Jubilee and was the ccontext and basis for the Scripture verse cast on America's iconic Liberty Bell: Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof [Leviticus 25:10; please read the entire chapter 25 to get the fuller picture.
So -- does the Bible teach of the equalitty of all men? Yes -- in terms of opportunity, and dignity, and also of sinfulness. It does not teach the equality of all men in terms of health, wealth, power, priazes, and social standing. And what it hass tyo say about the economies of this world is both too simple and too complex for our human minds, esspecially of those humans who reject the authority of God to start with.
P.S. I've said this before and Ill say it again and again, until somebody hears me: DROP THE OBSOLETE VOCABULARY OF "LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES" FROM THESE DEBATES. We are fighting about the principles of accountability and responsibility, and not the particlars of d
First off let me point out your verse citation has nothing to do with money, capitalism or free enterprise but instead is from a passage related to the works of the church. The idea that you can rend a single verse from a passage losing its true meaning and context and apply it to your dogma is an issue from both sides of this debate. Second the fact that you used the word "redistribution" is evidence that you are biased in the argument, this word has become synonymous with a "Robinhood" type ideology towards government programs aimed at helping the poor in this country. Thirdly, there is an intrinsic assumption that capitalism in itself is moral and spiritual rather than those who participate in capitalism infusing it with morality or spirituality. I find your argument overly simplified and lacking teeth due to these issues.
In an attempt to justify our own behaviors or beliefs it is easy to leave behind context in relation to the word and abandon truth and spiritual values. To make an argument that God is a capitalist or that he admonished capitalism is an attempt to reduce God to our level, and is counter productive to spiritual pursuits. Capitalism is a construct of man and is inherently flawed as a spiritual guide or premise because our works are counter spiritual as written in Galatians 5
16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
A better argument to make is to admonish people to act in a righteous and godly manner no matter what system or economic circumstance they face. In doing so you will foster a godly and spiritual attribute in them and they will have a greater chance of infusing their moral and spiritual virtues into our society.
I will leave you with this example as to why capitalism is neither inherently spiritual or moral with a story from our current events. A corporation Hill Country Farms had contracted work with another agricultural products company Henry's Turkeys to supply workers for its processing facility. They supplied 25-30 workers for which they were paid roughly $10,000 a week, while they ended up paying the workers $15 per week. This behavior happened for 25 years in which these men showed exceptional skill and work habits. You may ask why they didn't speak up or why they continued to work for such low wages, the reality is they didn't know any better as all these workers were mentally retarded. Hill Country is now being asked to return the missing pay and being further investigated for stealing these individuals SSI disbursements. This contracting work is completely legal capitalist in nature and as can be seen very profitable when done properly, yet this Company is run by people willing to steal and exploit people weaker then them making the act morally and spiritually bankrupt.
I admonish you to pray and meditate on the word and to live your lives as godly as you can and stop trying to justify your economic principles with misquoted scriptures.
Rev. Miller,
Your post also demonstrates your bias. If you are opposed to capitalism, then you are for socialism which has never provided the economic benefits of capitalism. You are advocating for LOWER standards of living which include food and shelter, clothing, medical services, emergency services, government services, etc. In other words, you are of the mistaken impression that G-d wants people to wallow in poverty to demonstrate how pious they are.
You are mistaken.
Your "example" is simplistic and may work with school children but not with adults. You don't judge an economic system by the human emotion of greed. Bureaucrats can be just as greedy as capitalists. Greed is part of human nature, not as an integral part of the whatever economic system you name.
The facts are around for anyone to see (who doesn't blinders on) that capitalism is a superior economic system to socialism or central planning. G-d gave us the intelligence to raise the standard of living for all by the most efficient means possible. Recommending an economic system that will put millions back into poverty is the most un-Christian act of all. Put the Bible aside for a while and study economics.
My bias is for the gospel, and not for an economic system. I made no endorsement of any political or economic system, the reason why you interpret bias is that you believe this fiction that God endorses any earthly behavior we create. As far as your sophomoric attack on my education I have a bachelors degree in economics with minors in political science and philosophy from EOSU, as well as my ecumenical education. If you were half as educated as you want me to be you would have been able to discern that I was admonishing people to quit trying to justify their beliefs with out of context quotes and simply live a moral life.
As far as your argument against my example, you say that my example is simplistic but even you missed the point that there is no morally intrinsic value in any economic system as people are directing it. You prattle on about greed being in bureaucracy as well as economic models and yet you miss the fact of the amoral value of the economic system, what ever the system it takes on the attributes of those that direct it. I could just as well relate this ideal to that of slavery, human trafficking, prostitution or any other such lascivious behavior that still exists in our world but the point would still be missed by you. Again I say quit trying to justify yourself with such foolish doctrines and go live your life to as godly as your abilities allow.
From a former student:
Michael Lind His position entirely rests upon "You don't have to be a religious person to agree with the general moral principle in play here." This reveals the authors false position on morality and is a red herring to the arguments of the Christians on the left. The morality of Christianity cannot defend Capitalism. You have to go outside of the Christian religion to defend capitalism. You have to abandon Christian morality before you can defend capitalism. The author implicitly expresses this without even knowing it. He is saying it is a "general moral principle." As if there are moral principles outside of Christian morality. The Christians on the left don't abandon their faith. They take it serious and they realize that political systems presuppose a moral basis. The moral basis that they use is the anti material, anti worldly, anti individual, anti capitalist, collective, social motivated, morality that the Bible presents. His only attempt at using his moral code to defend his weak position are a few parables where he completely context drops. The two main parables he uses - the parable of the talents and the parable of the vineyard workers - would nowhere near be a reference or a moral defense of capitalism. He selects that people were given talents but neglects that the parable is about (i)slaves(i). If you want to note anything about the political message of slaves, you can note that nowhere does Jesus even begin to dabble into political issues. If you claim that he does, then why the absence of not addressing the horrid political practices that he uses in his parables.
From a current student
Greg Taylor Tanis It's not perfect equality that most Christians on the left want; it's just to help those in extreme poverty with no opportunity or ability to help themselves out of oppression. It's about standing up for the oppressed, not perfect equality (which is impossible). Why does the church give at all? To help others.
from a current student
Greg Taylor Tanis If you're okay with some greedy having all the capital and others growing up in poverty with no opportunity, don't justify it with the Bible. I'm not suggesting the government can fix it, but the Church must realize that there is economic injustice. We must acknowledge it so that we can deal with it.
And the parable in Matthew 20 about the workers in the field seems to point out that God gives freely to all, regardless of how hard/long he has worked. The parable goes against what he is purporting.
How does the parable of the prodigal son fit in this schema? The son squanders all his inherited capital, then, realizing his great mistake, heads home and the father gives him everything he once had and more. He did nothing to earn it back except have a moment of clarity. If this is an accurate picture of the kingdom of God, how can you reconcile it with the economic hierarchy that you describe?
Good points all around. Truly apprcieated.
Join the Discussion