It is dead easy to attack the fundamental principles and historical practices of capitalism on religious, and particularly Christian, grounds. A system that thrives on self-interest and personal gain, that leads to massive exploitation, to the subjection of entire indigenous populations to colonial powers, to enormous economic and social inequalities, that celebrates greed and focuses entirely on wealth and power – is this anything like the teachings of Jesus? The Jesus who told his followers not even to be concerned even about what to eat and drink, to sell what they have and give to the poor, to bypass material comforts now for eternal life in God’s glorious kingdom later, to serve others instead of dominate them, to give rather than receive, to be willing to lay down their lives for those in need?
Among the various shifts in my life,
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Is Jesus saying “the Kingdom of God” more like saying ‘the Presidentupality of God’?
Like it or not, God &/or being good is a choice. Perhaps this is why so many bad things happen, and there is so much suffering.
God is a choice. Otherwise, E wouldn’t be God.
A person might do better if they go with God &/or being good. Just like one might do better if they get good nutrition, exercise, & brush their teeth, etc. But these things are still a choice.
Is Jesus saying “Kingdom” generally what we think of ‘kingdom’ to mean?
He appears to think that there will be a place where the kingdom is, rulers over it, one main ruler over them, and therefore rules for it.
I recommend strongly two new books: Jordan Ballor and Erik Matson, A History of Christian Political Economy, and Sources in Christian Political Economy.
Thanks!
As always, Dr Ehrman, you raise some really interesting issues that get me thinking. I know this is a very debatable point of view, but I’ve always thought that the Roman Empire (Jesus’s society, so to speak) was a rudimentary capitalist society. To be sure, it had a slavery driven economy, was often on a war footing and had far more government control than free market countries today would want; but it did encourage private enterprise, with no nationalised industries as such. Even the tax collection system was privatised (the publicani that Jesus was criticised for consorting with). I’m sure people can pick holes with my ‘thesis’ but perhaps Jesus could relate, to a degree, to the sort of society we live in today (or arguably to the ante-bellum Southern American society, which did have a slave-based economy).
Yes, it’s true, there were features of teh ancient Roman economy that can line up with what we have in capitalism. People did own businesses and want to make prophets, e.g. But it did not have many of the key features that economists identify as essential — massive (instead of occasional) wage labor, focused on competition to grow the economy; capital accumulation; detailed book keeping, etc. Rome as a whole was a slave-economy and the wealth was almost entirely agrarian (not production) with about 80-90% of the populatoin in rural areas working for owners, not being paid wages per se, not improving the economy through increase in goods and services, etc.
I am a medievalist, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think scholars agree that Rome was a command economy run by the military. The state had plantations for growing grain, factories for producing arms and other implements, mines, vineyards, etc. In short, despite contracting some business out to the equestrian class — famously, publican tax collectors — the state in its need to maintain its brutal empire was the main driver of the economy.
I don’t think Rome’s economy is imagined as being “run” by the military.
But otherwise I thyibnk I agree with most of your assessment: Military needs certainly dictated many of the requirements of the economy (gotta supply those troops) and provided modes of enforcement broadly speaking (in the provinces) ; but it is usually understood to be a “slave” economy, virtually entirely agrarian.
How do economic systems affect our environment?
I’ve always been an environmentalist so I’ve always tried to earn as little as possible. My philosophy is earn less, consume less. Wasteful overconsumption is a major factor in the destruction of our planet.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to be considered an environmentalist.
Prepping to teach Matthew 16:13-20 and thinking about Jesus as Son of God and recalling from your podcasts and blog posts your contention that it is only in John where Jesus refers to himself as Son of God; not in the synoptic tradition and that if the synoptists knew of this claim by Jesus, surely they would not have failed to mention it. But I don’t recall any take you had on Mt 11:27 (Q) and the parallel in Lk 10:21-22. Or the Markan trial narrative in 14:61? How would you square these? Thanks.
Jesus definitely presents homself as the Son of God in the Synoptic Gospels. But in Jewish tradition, that does not make him a “divine being” who has come down from heaven. In the Hebrew Bible Solomon is called “the Son of God” (2 Sam 7); as are other kings (Ps. 110); so is the nation of Israel (Hosea 11:1); so are (created) angels (Gen. 6; Job 1). “The son of God in Israelite thinking was teh person or collective that communicated and did God’s will as his representatives on earth. That’s who Jesus claims to be as well.disabledupes{9f28de78a15fa6e871b274b5009c05a6}disabledupes
I believe I’ve said that Jesus does not call himself GOD in the Synpoptics. He definitely presents himself as the Son of God in the Synoptic Gospels. But in Jewish tradition, that does not make him a “divine being” who has come down from heaven. In the Hebrew Bible Solomon is called “the Son of God” (2 Sam 7); as are other kings (Ps. 110); so is the nation of Israel (Hosea 11:1); so are (created) angels (Gen. 6; Job 1). “The son of God in Israelite thinking was teh person or collective that communicated and did God’s will as his representatives on earth. That’s who Jesus claims to be as well.
In both Luke and the gospel of Thomas, it says that the kingdom of heaven is within us and that it is scattered among us, and that people don’t see it.
I certainly don’t.
Is it possible that, in some shape or form, the KoH did come, is coming, & or is among us, and we just don’t see it or experience it?
Well, they seemed to think so. But very few others do…
Well, the majority isn’t always right.
🙂
Wouldn’t it be nice if it were?
It might make things easier…
I just ran into this video that talks about the Kingdom of Heaven. It says that it is really the Reign of Heaven/God instead of an actual, visible kingdom. The video makes some good points, even if it’s a bit “by the book”, so to speak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vki1-rSRSFU&list=TLPQMjkwODIwMjadLszYDuS_wA&index=2
Dr. Ehrman, do think the historical Jesus would have preached “not even to be concerned even about what to eat and drink, to sell what they have and give to the poor, to bypass material comforts now for eternal life in God’s glorious kingdom later” if he had known that the “Kingdom of God” would not yet arrive almost 2000 years later?
Not sure. Others did and do. But his is deeply rooted in the comining kingdom. If he didn’t believe in that, he would have had to get to these views some others way.
Dr. Ehrman, I love hearing about the roots of your own success! Your time in academia seems to bridge the business and communal worlds nicely.
I think its only in capitalistic nations that wealth is made, as long as there is a ‘citizen’s dividend’. Like Monopoly was invented to demonstrate, it all funnels to one person without redistribution. This isn’t just charity; its the bread dole too. Benefits migration tho requires “weeding the tares”, where lots of people *want* this nurturing, but enforcement based on following right ways of living ousts many.
So, I just found a book called “Mesopotamian Influence and the New Testament” by Dr. Baker and published by Cambridge in 2022 – and it has some of my hypothesese!! He believes Jesus is the Jewish Nabu.
The Father and Son worship of Marduk and Nabu are found along the 1rst C trade route of *cities*, like Antioch that replaces Gaza.
(I believe Dushara references Marduk’s pre-syncretic name, Ashar.)
The Antiquarian Revival recalibrates to the og Sumerian religion that becomes syncretized Yahwism. Imo this includes Ea as an outback El the Father, the pastoralist deity Sin, and the desert food miracle god Ha when he replaces Seth Baal.
Jesus Christ never told his disciples to collect money or to build buildings or to create wealth. He never asked for money. He never gave money – only love, lessons, knowledge of the Kingdom of GOD, healing
and food. Jesus Christ was teaching to live a life that searches for the LIGHT not materialism.
I was raised in similar environments which portrayed Capitalism as antithetical to Christianity. I spent a lot of time trying to reconcile the various areas of tension between the two.
Many Catholic social ethical writers allow themselves to ignore the issue of scarcity, but capitalism has to deal with it. (The entire field of Economics has to deal with the issue of scarcity.) God’s grace is infinite, but resources on Earth are not. And as the scale of our communities and economies increase in size, we are forced to consider not just what a person might deserve, but also what society can afford.
There’s also the issue that God cannot possibly want to impede human flourishing. Like it or not – capitalism has done more to eradicate global poverty and lift the global standard of living than any other force in history. Command economies (like communism or socialism) can’t effectively or efficiently allocate scarce resources – that’s why we need prices – prices convey information about how “hard” something was to get. Build your own microprocessor – impossible. Buy one from the global computing industry? A couple of hundred bucks.
As Christians, it is of course our duty to bring the Kingdom of God to our streets. But the most effective way to eventually get there (and it is slow) is capitalism.
Capitalism presumes that private capital is traded, supply and demand and competition determines the production and price of goods and services, and sometimes but not usually a free market. The the current scale this system is a recent innovation – make no mistake, the market is highly regulated and the regulations land hardest on people without power. States, counties, cities, towns, townships, and villages levy restrictions, regulations and fines that confine but opportunity and truly free association.
Socialism in all of its forms is not better and once again, not a free market – just different constraints.
Mikail Balkunin put forth a philosophy that there should be no constraints ever on association – social, commercial, or otherwise – and that the hierarchical State causes more problems than it solves. One of those problems exhibited by the current system is the privilege and power consolidating in a few super rich. Supposed experts (“savants”) elevated by the State and its bureaus generate more chaos than benefit.
The convoluted Church heirarchy(ies) are no better. Not a whit.
every chance you get…..Defund Church and State