"Economics and finance have not escaped the onslaught of anti-Christian thought"

I guess now would be a good time to reprise our occasional debates on economics and the Bible! Of course, this entry - which asserts that modern liberal economic theory was created by a homosexual according to his depraved thinking - is FAR more helpful to your arguments (that capitalism is more or less based on Biblical principles) than mine (which was that economics is morally neutral, which means that socialism isn't necessarily evil in and of itself, and that capitalism isn't inherently virtuous)!

From the linked article...

Jerry Bowyer wrote:

Keynes endorsed the atheistic views of fellow "apostle" G.E. Moore, who, having presented the con argument when the society debated whether to allow God as a member, led the chant "God, out! God, out!" Keynes said that the chief benefit of Moore's atheism was that "we entirely repudiated a personal liability on us to obey general rules. We claimed the right to judge every individual case on its merits, and the wisdom to do so successfully. This was a very important part of our faith, violently and aggressively held, and for the outer world it was our most obvious and dangerous characteristic. We repudiated entirely customary morals, conventions and traditional wisdom."

I haven't read the entire article closely but it doesn't appear that it argues that Keynes' homosexuality had much to do with it. I think it's quite clear that his atheism and view of morality in general did.
Equally clear: Keynes did not claim his economic theory was religiously neutral. It seems to have arisen in the context of outspoken atheism. (Though the quote is not about economics specifically).
His own words need no additional argument from me that what we believe about trade cannot possibly be morally (much less biblically) neutral.

The idea that "modern liberal economic theory" is essentially Keynesian is not disputed much, I think.

Aaron wrote:

The idea that "modern liberal economic theory" is essentially Keynesian is not disputed much, I think.

Well, it all depends on what you mean by "liberal." Actually the classical economics of the Austrian School, which probably underpins much of your "capitalism," is really classical Liberalism.

Since Reaganomics, Keynesian thinking has lost much of its sway. Prior to Reagan, the Presidents beginning with Kennedy and including Nixon were pretty much Keynesian. Now, who knows what the current mess is?

I think the current financial mess can be summed up as "Take care of your friends and don't worry about tomorrow".

"Modern liberalism" pretty much differentiates it from classical liberalism.
Agree that just about everybody from Wilson to Ford was either Keynesian or some less developed precursor. Keynes was really more about economic method/process than about social ethics, but (modern) liberal social ethics definitely found a friend in his method.

Aaron Blumer wrote:

"Modern liberalism" pretty much differentiates it from classical liberalism.
Agree that just about everybody from Wilson to Ford was either Keynesian or some less developed precursor. Keynes was really more about economic method/process than about social ethics, but (modern) liberal social ethics definitely found a friend in his method.

Yes, but if memory serves me well, Kennedy was the first to publicly and openly embrace Keynesian theory.