i’d like to add that the old testament also challenges the notion that one’s obedience to God results in prosperity (see books of job and eccelsiastes). in fact, we see the struggle of the writers to make sense of the fact that shitty things happen to the righteous while the wicked continue in long life and wealth. if that’s the case, it should at least cause us to question whether our wealth (mine, yours, the guy down the street) is a result of following God, or –?

I think Walsh is saying, “If America continues to do the things that historically brought it short-term prosperity, then prosperity cannot come about alongside a more peaceful planet.” That is, they are mutually exclusive.

I could be wrong as well, but I (unlike you) admit that I am at best guessing what Walsh means.

I agree with Walsh, but I (like you), believe that it is not evil to be rich. The problem lies in what one does with his or her riches.

“I’m sorry, but greater prosperity for this one nation or its rich neighbours to the North will not and cannot result in a more peaceful planet. That is something that not even God can pull off. More importantly, God isn’t interested in pulling off that kind of prosperity for America.”

So instead of echoing the call of the Old Testament prophets, who said that with greater faithfulness (i.e., more justice, mercy, and walking with God) would come greater blessings and more peace, he states that greater prosperity would result in less peace, regardless of whether the prosperity comes as the result of right living.

If true, then the problem is not the riches/blessings, but what we choose to do with them.