Not withstanding this discussion on the economics of two religions, I have to note the deeper damnation of these United State are being put under due to codifying immorality once again. This past Tuesday the US Senate presumably completed the passage of the Radical Respect for Marriage Act. See also the USA Today Article: Senate passes landmark legislation protecting same-sex marriage rights: recap .This law fully uses Article IV §1 ‘Full faith and Credit’ clause and the Obergefell ruling, which again misused the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. Now we know that SCOTUS took an immoral position in 2015 with Obergefell v. Hodges, which my state, Ohio, was one of the petitioning States in this case. SCOTUS ruled against the citizens and Constitutions of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee.
With this immoral law soon to become reality, the question of Two Religions goes well beyond economics. In this weeks program I give you a strong provocation regarding modern economics being morally determined by the statists, including most evangelicals, instead of being morally determined by God centered worldview thinkers and policy makers.
Just remember, that morality can be legislated. The question is: Whose and which morality? And to get the hair on your neck raised I want to use a quote I would have liked to come up with in regard to Christian letting humanists, secular or christian, control most everything:
‘Christians have resigned themselves to be breeders for the Secularists.1’
The Economics Of Two Religions
This program is back to economics, that of the Global Reset Being the Economics of Two Religions. Once again, I am several decades late in finding a way to be a greater influence on those around me. I am going back in time here, to the ancient days of the mid-1980’s. Yet, the point of The Economics of Two Religions is ‘get a general sense of what happens in the field of economics when rival religions clash: power religion vs. dominion religion.’ – Gary North, Moses and Pharaoh, page 18
This is being fully played out, based on all the reporting, in the Sinai Desert while attending the global COP27 climate conference. The so-called religious leaders are there to await their new Ten Commandments. This is the actions of ‘power religion’ who will accept and foster the tyranny of the climate gods. If you have not followed this then go to the references for some articles regarding this global religious effort established in the United Nations plan.
As we look at the global economic religion of humanistic atheism, nome other than Klaus Schwab proclaimed that Communist China will likely serve as a “role model” for many countries as the global community embarks upon a “systemic transformation of the world”. Taking this World Economic Forum position into consideration, anyone that does not believe that there is a relationship between economics, liberty and religion does not understand that a dung-pile beetle is the Scarab of Egyptian religious symbology. Levity intended here..
Seriously, Alfred Marshall argued back in 1890 that as for religion in economics,
‘the two great forming agencies of the world’s history have been the religious and the economic.’ – Alfred Marshall’s Principles of Economics, page 1
With that in mind we will delve a bit deeper into the portion of the Genesis battle between the economics of Pharaoh (Satan) and Moses (God’s Biblical design). I will leave you with this final thought from ‘Toward a Kuyperian Political Economy’ – my emphasis added with italics –
‘Anthony Randazzo and Jonathan Haidt (2015) have recently presented signiicant evidence that, in fact, “economists’ value judgments permeate economics” (p. 52). They conclude by asserting that “‘value-free economics’ is no more likely to exist than is the frictionless world of high school physics problems” (p. 54). One might even argue that the shortfalls of rational choice theory as pointed out by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky (1979; Tversky and Kahneman 1981, 1986) and Robert Frank (1987a, 1987b, 1988, 1989a, 1989b, 1996) ought also to apply to economists themselves. They too make decisions about what to study, how to study it, and how to judge their indings based on personal preferences and commitments in addition to self-interest (in this case, publishing a purely value-free article). And that is sometimes rational or at least “shrewdly irrational,” to use Frank’s (1987a) phrase.
The simple point is that there is, in all reality, no such thing as ‘value-free’ economics or economists.
Injecting Thomas Sowell –
I did want to capture and share a few related thoughts from the Thomas Sowell book ‘BASIC ECONOMICS A Citizen’s Guide to the Economy’:
Facts are stubborn things, and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. -JOHN ADAMS
Page 5 – To know what economics is, we must first know what an economy is. Perhaps most of us think of an economy as a system for the production and distribution of the goods and services we use in everyday life. That is true as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. The Garden of Eden was a system for the production and distribution of goods and services, but it was not an economy, because everything was available in unlimited abundance. Without scarcity, there is no need to economize-and therefore no economics. A distinguished British economist named Lionel Robbins gave the classic definition of economics:
Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses.
Page 5 – What does “scarce” mean? It means that what everybody wants adds up to more than there is. This may seem like a simple thing, but its implications are often grossly misunderstood, even by highly educated people.
To finish this section with Sowell and transition back to the bondage people and nations have come to accept in economics, I want Sowell to again get your ‘grey matter’ working on these thoughts on Non-economic Values:
Page 255 – While economics offers many insights and makes it easier to see through some popular notions that sound good but will not stand up under scrutiny, economics has also acquired the name “the dismal science” because it pours cold water on many otherwise attractive and exciting-but fallacious-notions about how the world can be arranged. One of the last refuges of someone whose pet project or theory has been exposed as economic nonsense is to say: “Economics is all very well, but there are also noneconomic values to consider.” Presumably, these are supposed to be higher and nobler concerns that soar above the level of crass materialism.
Of course there are non-economic values. In fact, there are only non-economic values. Economics is not a value in and of itself. It is only a way of weighing one value against another.
Remaining In Bondage – Of the Two Religions
Before touching on a bit of Bastiat from his ‘Essays on Political Economy,’ I want to give you another interesting quote from Gary North to ponder as we look at the people willing to remain in bondage –
‘Most amusingly, one of these interventionists has accused me of holding Enlightenment ideas,2 not realizing that he and his associates are the true heirs of the dominant Enlightenment tradition, the tradition which exalts the State. When these “radical Christian” critics think “Enlightenment,” they think “Adam Smith.” They obviously do not understand the Enlightenment. When we look at the historical results of the Enlightenment, we should think “French Revolution, Russian Revolution, and President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.” We should think “the glorification of the State.”
‘…But this individualistic tradition barely survived the revolutionary and statist Enlightenment heritage. What the successful bearers of the torch of the Enlightenment did was to set Europe on fire – in the name of liberty, fraternity, and equality. James Billington’s book has described it well: Fire in the Minds of Men (1980). It was the left wing of the Enlightenment which triumphed. When men deify mankind, they almost always wind up deifying the State, the highest collective of mankind, the apotheosis of man’s power. They become adherents of the power religion.’
Now leaving this section, just ponder again what Bastiat writes in: That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen
‘In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause–it is seen. The others unfold in succession–they are not seen: it is well for us if they are foreseen. Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference–the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favourable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.’
Solution to the Economics of Two Religions
It most certainly comes down to Christian Paideia. What is that? I wasn’t sure until I watched a Man Rampant interaction titled “Education & Kingmaking.’ The simple definition comes from Ephesians 6:4 to which the Im this section of Man Rampant is:
‘The process of inculturation…the process through which a youngster was insinuated into the customs and beliefs of his people.’
Now I had to dig deeper on this since we know that our present educational system is forcing godless world religion of the Pharaoh order on our children. To help you out, here is a solid link that takes the Greek word in its full context for you to act upon: Paideia
Oh, and as to that solution to the Economics of Two religions we discussed, well the first is to clearly know that ‘Christians have resigned themselves to be breeders for the Secularists.3’
Therefore, the necessity is for a clear work of God to return those who call themselves ‘Christian’ to a factual and coherent Biblical Worldview that truly has contextual Biblical foundations.
Like it or not, without a starting point admitting that God is Sovereign over all things, humanity and political economics bows to the ‘power religion’ of Pharaoh. How else can Pharaoh be escaped except through the ‘sphere’s of sovereignty’ that are encompassed by ‘dominion religion4.’
This week I leave you with the 1828 Webster definitions of Economy. Oh so different than what we even begin to consider in the present.
ECON’OMY, noun [Latin oeconomia; Gr. house, and law, rule.]
1. Primarily, the management, regulation and government of a family or the concerns of a household.
2. The management of pecuniary concerns or the expenditure of money. Hence,
3. A frugal and judicious use of money; that management which expends money to advantage, and incurs no waste; frugality in the necessary expenditure of money. It differs from parsimony, which implies an improper saving of expense. economy includes also a prudent management of all the means by which property is saved or accumulated; a judicious application of time, of labor, and of the instruments of labor.
4. The disposition or arrangement of any work; as the economy of a poem.
5. A system of rules, regulations, rites and ceremonies; as the Jewish economy
6. The regular operation of nature in the generation, nutrition and preservation of animals or plants; as animal economy; vegetable economy
7. Distribution or due order of things.
8. Judicious and frugal management of public affairs; as political economy
9. System of management; general regulation and disposition of the affairs of a state or nation, or of any department of government.
1. Toward a Kuyperian Political Economy: On the Relationship between Ethics and Economics, by Dylan Pahman, Acton Institute, Sophia Institute
2. Calvinism and the Rise of Capitalism in Scotland, by Karen Brown, University of Northern Iowa
2. Moses and Pharaoh
6. Distinction Between Positive and Normative Economics Misses the Point by Donald Marron
7. Investopedia: Positive vs. Normative Economics: What’s the Difference? By AMY FONTINELLE Updated April 05, 2022, Reviewed by MICHAEL J BOYLE, Fact checked by YARILET PEREZ
1Education & Kingmaking – Douglas Wilson & Dr. Ben Merkle, Man Rampant Season 2
2Ronald Sider, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger (rev. ed.; Downers Grove, Illinois: Inter-Varsity Press, 1984), p. 102.
3Education & Kingmaking – Douglas Wilson & Dr. Ben Merkle, Man Rampant Season 2
4See the definition of ‘Dominion Religion’ on page 23 of Moses and Pharaoh.