Jesus On Economics - Libertarian Christian Institute \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

Jesus On Economics - Libertarian Christian Institute libertarianchristians.com/2025/03/24/jesus-on-economics/

800 sats \ 20 comments \ @kepford 25 Mar econ

Jesus told parables to teach His disciples spiritual truth. In each parable, he used truth about the physical world that was well known and accepted by the audience. He used mankind’s innate knowledge about the reality of earthly life to teach them about the reality of spiritual life. The word “parable” itself comes from the Greek word to “throw to the side”, highlighting the comparison between spiritual and physical. In Matthew 20:1-16, often titled the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, Jesus uses economic truth to teach what the Kingdom of God is like. Does it encourage you to know that the Kingdom of God, in many ways, mirrors the earthly kingdoms we live in? It does that for me.

The earthly truth which Jesus embeds in this parable is that subjective value and private property rights for an individual are right, lawful, and good. This should be remembered whenever someone speaks ill of natural rights or individualism, or when reading passages such as Romans 13:1-4 and 1 Peter 2:13-16.

view all related items

106 sats \ 12 replies \ @SimpleStacker 25 Mar

Well I'm glad they at least bring up Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2. I think it's very hard for Christians to adopt any kind of anarcho-libertarian position, but I think a softer, limited government position is very much consistent with biblical teaching.

88 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined 25 Mar

I’ve definitely read interpretations of Romans 13 that are fully aligned with anarchism and that were not put forward for that purpose.

239 sats \ 7 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

The problem with most people's understanding of Romans 13 is that they don't read the previous chapter. Of course we know chapters are just markers added later to help the reader, but its hard to read the two together and walk away thinking Paul is talking about the Roman government in his description. It seems to me to be more of a what government should be. And in the context of this discussion we can also include non-state governance.

Contrary to what many Christians think, I would argue Romans is more about how we should respond to authority not, the legitimacy of it or its being "right". When you read the entire Bible it is full from start to finish of a battle between the idolatrous relationship of the people and the state/kings. Kings that put themselves in the position of a god. That constantly put themselves in opposition to God.

The main issue though that affects the church is how the state influences the church. I'm of the view that we are first citizens of the Kingdom of God. We are aliens in a foreign land and our goal is higher than the sinful affairs of the state. We should not get distracted by them and forget that all kingdoms fall. All but the Kingdom of God.

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 25 Mar

Contrary to what many Christians think, I would argue Romans is more about how we should respond to authority not, the legitimacy of it or its being "right". When you read the entire Bible it is full from start to finish of a battle between the idolatrous relationship of the people and the state/kings. Kings that put themselves in the position of a god. That constantly put themselves in opposition to God.

Exactly this.

This is exactly why so few truly understand the Bible’s teachings: they are always aligned with God, not with human power structures. That’s why you so often hear people say, “Go find God.”

56 sats \ 5 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

Romans 13:3–4

"[3] For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, [4] for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer."

Its hard for me to read this knowing all that is recorded by Paul about the government he was under and believe he is describing Rome. Was he referring to Nero as well? Hitler? Obviously there's some context within this letter to the church that is needed to better understand it.

It makes much more sense to me as being a description of authority and how they should behave, but also how Christians should behave in the face of authority over them. Remember that there were revolutionary groups during this time. We can be pretty sure that they were an influence on the readers of Paul's writing.

How much more powerful are these writings when you realize what Paul would endure at the hands of the government of his day. He was a Roman citizen and he used his rights of citizenship to his benefit, or rather the benefit of his mission.

Paul disobeyed the government as did most of the early Christians. However they didn't seem to resist with violence. We see in historical writings of the time that Christians refused to defend themselves in the Roman gladiatorial fights for example.

It seems to me that Paul could have been trying to reframe the view upward, away from the oppressors. The Roman state.

I'm not a theologian but I have listened to many discuss these two chapters and read them and thought about them for many years. Just my current thoughts.

79 sats \ 4 replies \ @SimpleStacker 25 Mar

I don't disagree, but it's hard to read this passage and conclude that state power is always illegitimate:

Romans 13:6-7 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

I think I'd consider myself Kuyperian in my understanding of political issues (the notion of sphere sovereignty)

37 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

That's fair. To that point I go back to the idea of state power vs. hierarchy. I think it is hard to read the Bible and leave with a view that anything that places itself above God is legitimate. Are these authorities "ministers of God" or is that just what they should be. Like many passages I think we might be asking to much of these verses.

Personally I apply this passage in that I need to submit to the state in most things as God has allowed it to exist. I know this is a temporary situation and God's justice will be done in the end. Obviously there are times when we should or must resist or go against the state, but I believe I must be prepared to accept the consequences of that decision. I pray for the rulers over me. I don't hate them. They are not my enemy. The system is however. It is not God's system. Its a fallen world where Satan roams about seeking to destroy.

I'm always reminded of when the children of Israel asked for a king like the other nations. God makes it clear that this is a rejection of Him, not Samuel. During this time God's people lived under the authority of judges and were advised by the prophets.

Here's where I think modern Christians read to much into Romans 13. I don't think this is Paul saying this is God's system. Its hard to see that. It is for me. I have a hard time believing you can have a "Christian" state. Christ does not share his throne with men. But, if Jesus didn't overthrow Roman with military force it makes it hard for me to say we should do this. I can accept that the state is legit if by that it is meant that its existence is above me. I reject the idea that its God's ideal form of governance.

I hold to "No king but Christ". But its not my place to overthrow the rulers of this world. I pray that Christ would overthrow their hearts, that they would seek to be stewards of his will and live by Romans 13.

view all 1 replies

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

I once heard Bob Murphy bring up this point in the application of Rom 13.

If Romans 13 means Christians should support their government, then what justification can the US have to overthrow the government in Iraq. After all, Rom 13 says they are "ministers of God".

Most that hold to Romans 13 justifying governments like the one in the US seem to be pretty flexible in its application. Its interesting to say the least.

This is an area of much disagreement and I think its healthy to wrestle with it. I have for years. Those that seem to use Romans 13 to justify the US gov don't like to talk about Nazi Germany and how it was applied by churchmen of the time that remained silent. I don't see a massive gap between Nazi Germany and Rome of Paul's day. There's a clear difference but on the authoritarian side of things Rome was pretty terrible... and yet. We have Romans 13 to deal with.

reply on another page

28 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

Actually 1 Peter 2:13–17 is very helpful.

[13] Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, [14] or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. [15] For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. [16] Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. [17] Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor. (ESV)

Peter goes on to advise us towards a humble attitude doing this as service to God.

reply on another page

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

Same here.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 25 Mar

Huh, i'd be interested in reading that

30 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

I think you may be conflating governance(authority) with government (the state). They often are one and the same but don't have to be.

176 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

There is a very prominent "socialist influenced" movement within the church.

It largely comes from Jesus teachings about giving and the early church's habit of sharing with those in need. In my experience Christians who lean into socialism and away from "capitalism" understand neither economic system or economics.

I get why people think Jesus was a socialist. This isn't because it is true but because socialists have co-opted Christian practice. The problem with this is that Christian practice is meant to be done by Christian individuals and the church. Not a secular institution that uses violence to enact equality.

What I like about this article is how it points out the two examples of subjective value and private property rights. Both of these views are antithetical to socialism. Socialism is not just wrong, it is evil. Its not that I can't afford socialism. Its that the poor can't afford it.

I have a t-shirt that says the following:

Jesus wasn't a socialist. He actually fed people

Socialism simply does not work. It leads to starvation and poverty. Free markets and ones led by a morally strong people lead to prosperity and abundance.

48 sats \ 0 replies \ @Car 25 Mar

Beautiful.

30 sats \ 0 replies \ @Butterfinger 25 Mar

Oh I need something like that and be around other christian libertarians

60 sats \ 2 replies \ @ContraMundum5 25 Mar

The parable itself is not primarily about economics. It is about God’s grace and the way He rewards people in His kingdom.

Jesus often used familiar earthly concepts to teach spiritual truths, and in this case, He describes a landowner paying workers the same wage regardless of when they started. The key lesson is that God’s grace is not based on human standards of fairness. Whether someone comes to faith early or late in life, God rewards them equally with salvation. Your post argues that because Jesus uses an economic example, it suggests that private property and individualism are “right, lawful, and good.” However, while the parable does acknowledge property rights as part of the story’s setting, the main point is about the generosity and sovereignty of God, not an endorsement of specific economic systems. But I appreciate your point.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford OP 25 Mar

The parable itself is not primarily about economics. It is about God’s grace and the way He rewards people in His kingdom

Oh course you are correct, the point is more about these ideas being attacked and a modern idea of socialism being pushed upon Jesus. God is above all this. However we do have the law and prophets and they seem to align with the ideas of private property.

48 sats \ 0 replies \ @ContraMundum5 25 Mar

Oh I totally agree with you. 100% the Bible gives clear pictures of private property.

41 sats \ 0 replies \ @joseph_at_nostr_fan 27 Mar

Great points, it is also a difficult parable because for many when they read it for the first time it feels unfair.

But when you go deeper into what it teaches you realize that the scenario is much bigger than we thought, I like the NLT version, here I quote the first verse, and the two last onea:

“For the Kingdom of Heaven is like the landowner who went out early one morning to hire workers for his vineyard. 2 He agreed to pay the normal daily wage and sent them out to work...

He answered one of them, ‘Friend, I haven’t been unfair! Didn’t you agree to work all day for the usual wage? 14 Take your money and go. I wanted to pay this last worker the same as you. 15 Is it against the law for me to do what I want with my money? Should you be jealous because I am kind to others?’

16 “So those who are last now will be first then, and those who are first will be last.”

The lessons are many:

God is sovereign
He makes us free, and sovereign as well.
God approves the free market, and the ownership of money.
God is for freedom, not socialism.
The vineyard represents work, but also our life on earth. What is visible here, is not necessarily what will count in Heaven. That is why the first will be the last, what the world values is not what God values. God sees the heart, and the values of mankind in action, not wealth or fame.