To the Guy who argued that Free Market Capitalism is the best invention on the history of the planet:

I argued with a guy at length tonight on free market capitalism, Religous Science, spirituality, and Nebraska football among other things. He contended that profit is the powerful, and good, motivator for human activity. Profit, with careful regulation, seeks the good of the individuals. Albeit, I was able to have him hone his definition of "individual" to mean "shareholders, owners, and trustees."

He used the church as an example to prove the success of capitalism and how it fits in with God's plans. He lifted up examples like Joel Osteen and the folks at Prestonwood as they were able to deliver the best "product" because of the masses they were able to bring in.

He said if a minister set his allowance at 10% of what was received, then who's to argue that whether $10 or $100,000 is brought in. It's a matter of capitalism that a better preacher is able to produce a more abundant "harvest."

To this guy, I offer one rejoinder that got lost in trying to understand each other: the church, unlike profit-driven corporations and industries, does not exist for itself. If it has more at the end of the day, it may have actually done its job wrong.

A friend of mine uses this illustration: Miller Brewing Company exists to bring Miller beer products to the market. In existence with other brewing companies, Miller must resourcefully present and establish their product in this pluralistic beer market. At the end of the day, for Miller, a successful bottom line proves its successful existence.

The church does not exist for a bottom line but to give itself away totally and freely just as Jesus did for the world. The bottom line for the church is: "how did we give our lives, resources, time, and talent away today?" In a profit-driven world, where the bottom line means improvement for investors and shareholders, the church stands as a counter cultural society that says, "we receive in order to give."

Miller brewing exists for itself and for its self-interests. The church is interested in being faithful to the mission that God has called it to, and that may mean giving everything up and forsaking profit lines and statistically wonderful data.

I consider this line of thinking--of existing wholly for the other--to be one of the major examples that lives out the Apostle Paul's line of thinking in 1 Corinthians: the message of the cross is utter foolishness. It's nonsense. How can we give it all away and expect to be successful at God's mission? Maybe success needs redefining. And I believe that the redefinition will not have much to do with free-market capitalism.