Business for the Glory of God Essay

AbstractIt is not a secret to any whiz that the USA has pick out western European line ethic model. Considering the dominance of Judeo-Christian goal in that region, it is of sm any wonder that quite a few deterrent example principles from the Bible bring on entered the field of international affairs. I kick up that we oppose the two sets of morals the unmatched hidden beneath the texts of the Bible and the unrivalled widely applied in business. The motion in the world of dialogue has been traditionally catchn as some topic that cannot possibly contri totallye anything to matinee idol worship. Ambitions and wealth, retention owning and development of valet labor (however slight and well rewarded) are admited sinful in the whimsey of representatives of the traditional branches of Christianity, such as the Orthodox and Catholic churches. further Wayne Grudem claims that an effective work of any businessman can be a proper way to glorify the Holy Father. I suggest that we check into some of the suppositions provided by the author in his give-and-take byplay for the eminence of graven image the Bibles Teaching on the Moral faithfulness of Business.They ordain be criticized from a few points of view, and certain remarks will be included based on the humors of Karl Marx and John Kaynes. John Kaynes happen upon a curious comment c erstrning the discussed subject Capitalism is the astounding whimsy that the wickedest of men will do the wickedest of things for the greatest good of every whiz. These words cannot be disregarded (for the thought of private business is a tri barelye to capitalism), because Kaynes is one of the developers of modern economic theory, yet, this remark contradicts with the main idea of Grudem. Can it be simply because Kayness point of view is a realistic one and the author of the mentioned book makes assumptions about what the ground of things could be like in perfect conditions? Wayne Grudem does not deny the fact that the current perception of business is based on just observations and the experience of the past, yet he claims that no(prenominal) of the elements of business and negotiation has been initially cruel.Four chapters of Grudems book (ownership, capital, distinctionof willpower, borrowing and lending) concern material possessions and their fuckment. The traditional interpretation of the Bible states that any type of possession is sinful therefore the disciples who take the veil make a vow of meagerness. Obviously, poverty cannot keep the business running. Such misunderstanding of the Bible (for I chalk up with the author, there is no allusion to the virtue of poverty in the Bible) among the Orthodox and Catholics is a result of the traditional hierarchical structure of the society originated in the Dark Ages (early Middle Ages), where the top figure on the scale would collect almost all the earned money (collected crops, livestock, produced goods) and manage it in the way he (back in those days women were prosecuted even for eyesight dreams, it was virtually impossible for one of them to gain a risque post) would come across it appropriate.Both Grudem and Marx agree on the ultimate importance of money (as an variantred of possession or its poster) in the modern society. At some point, I do agree with the author of the book barter used to die away down the development of the occupation therefore, money as an equivalent, a measure for all products and services was initially a good idea and it nonetheless remains a useful and practical invention. Also, it was a sensible idea for the author to draw a fine line between the money as an object and love of money, as a root of all evil. At this point, the opinions of Grudem and Marx coincide (at least somewhat), because Karl Marx also chose to differentiate the archetype of money and the concept of capital (which here we can interpret as wealth). Therefore, I do not share the authors opinion about the money as fundamentally good thing, but I can easily agree with it being a inert but very useful invention.As a basic concept seems now kinda clear, I suggest that we move further, to the complex outlet of possession. In the book Business for the glory of God a passion for possession is seen as a positive phenomenon, the wish to expand ones care and responsibility, but Marx attributes this desire to the realm of capitalism and the accept for an increasing surplus nourish for major manufacturers, which only results in ventilation of poverty on the other pole (considering that the surplus value is the value of the produced goods with the laborers salary subtracted from it). One could argue that uneven dispersal of wealth has been there forever since the simplest hierarchies appeared within savage human communities. so far the profoundstudies of the civilizations of the past uncover one curious fact there has always been poverty, but the persons income never depended solely on the products of his or her labor, the person would also receive a fraction of normal wealth, appropriate for his or her (mostly his) social status. There was hardly such thing as you get only as much as you wear.The mentioned phenomenon can be attributed to the origination of capitalism in the Middle Ages. Again, Grudem sees this distinction of possession as an inherent element of the human society and Marx finds it a drawback of the current economic dodge. However, it cannot go unnoticed that the first author addresses the concept, and the help author explains the peculiarities of its performance in the condition situation. But here they are, the opinion of a theologian against the opinion of the father of the modern economy. Owning private property calls for responsibility, but possession is much more likely to corrupt a person than to organize him or her. I mogul even agree with Karl Marx on the subject of capitalism being a transitional state of the development of the world economy, and a highly unbalanced one. It also might be that time will show that Grudem was wrong, and any type of possession is initially evil and corrupting for the human society but I am absolutely convinced that humankind will not be willing to part with this particular sin anytime soon.Yet in his book Wayne Grudem raises the subject of voluntary contribution of some part of possessions to the of necessity of the others the matter that could be the answer to balancing the world discrepancy of what one needs and what one gets. In general, improvement of moralities of all people could be a good way to address many global issues, but the idea of founding a new, perfect society based solely on high morals is nobody but Utopia. Grudem also discusses the perplexity of productivity. On the one hand, I cannot gather why the subject entered the list of perplexing issues, for hard as Ive tried to find a ace relevant work that would count this saying as a ban one, I fail ed.On the other hand, it pleased me to discover the point that had arisen no discussion, the quintessence of everyones agreement all Christian churches find high productivity of any activity a blessing from God, Karl Marx and John Kaynes consider high productivity a result of effective utilization of sources and optimisation of processes of manufacturing (of course, these two authors also pay attention to the possible drawbacks of this phenomenon, such asoverproduction, but Grudem only addresses the general positive concept of productivity, therefore, I suggest that we set aside its probable side effects for now). Karl Marx even commented once on the subject of manufacturing, production and productivity, saying that human labor is what makes a difference between the initial and the final product and the difference in their cost apart from that, a man can do nothing above what nature (in the context of my work nature could be substituted withGod) is capable of, which is changing onl y form of things. It is still a question open for discussion whether the joy of creating something new is an attribute to the godly origins of the human body and soul, but it definitely lifts ones spirits to see a new high-quality and beautiful thing created with her or his own hands.The lastly controversial point on which Id like to reap light is employment. Karl Marx sees this aspect as one of the first signs of a running(a) capital an employer has obtained a big enough capital to free himself from natural labor and allows money to work for him (the exchange of parts of capital for employees labor). The Orthodox and Catholic churches see employment as a neutral thing. Yet, considering the aspect of the sinful origins of any possession, the appropriate reward for work is seen as food, shelter and a good emplacement, but hardly ever any money. Basically, the traditional get of Church to paying with conveniences for labor, a kind of barter, seems to have much in common with the ideology of the communist system (the hierarchical scales of both seem quite similar as well). The approach has proven itself to be inapplicable in the current capitalistic world.Therefore, given a just attitude of an employer towards the employees, fair wages and good work conditions, the phenomenon of employment does not seem to bear any initially evil origin. As for the perversions that have invaded the original neutral-good model of employment, I can only add that even a fork could be used for thrust eyes instead of picking food. The book Business for the glory of God the Bibles Teaching on the Moral Goodness of Business by Wayne Grudem does have a seed of truth in it, because none of the discussed concepts has been developed for harm on the contrary, most of them were designed to make the commerce and cooperation easier for everyone. And in the perfect conditions, in the world, where morality possesses the ultimate value and no perversions are ever implemented into the elabor ate structures of cooperation, thefunctioning of the designed processes would go smoothly, provoking no discontent from any of the parties.The love of money seems to have corrupted the society and the developed tools are used for increasing the income rather than for harmonizing the relationships between people and providing high-quality products for everyone. Indeed, now business is seen as something that lacks morals and ethics, but with a bit of effort and a major change of attitude it could be aimed at achieving a global welfare.ReferencesGrudem, W. (2003). Business for the glory of god the bibles teaching on the moral goodness of business. Wheaton, Illinois crossbreeding Books. Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. United Kingdom Palgrave Macmillan. Marx, K. H. (1867). Capital. (4 ed., Vol. 1). Chicago Charles H. Kerr and Co.