) In what context will most humans carry out these commands? 2) How will humans know if they are doing a good job carrying out these commands?

Profits from an Economic and Biblical Perspective

Within a functioning market economy, profits act as an indispensable instrument through which organizations can indicate their business efficiency in creating a net value. Profit, or the difference between total revenue and total expenses, serves as a key economic concept that can be used to measure an enterprise's performance. From the biblical viewpoint, profit signifies the prudent management of God's creation and an implementation of God's will. In the approach to determine the optimization of profits from an economic and biblical perspective, it is important first to define the profitability concept in order to differentiate it from loss. Profit can be defined as a financial benefit with respect to the total revenue a company earns minus the organizational expenditure or other subsidiary cost that can be incurred. Loss represents the other side of profit as it is the other side of ordinary financial situations. In this vein, profit can be conceptualized as the positive difference between revenues and expenses, and loss can be seen as a negative difference, creating a path for further discussion to conceptualize how profit mimics the potential of the organization to augment customers, employees, and all stakeholders lives.

The word "work" in Genesis 2:15 serves as the answer for the query of how humanity carries out the subduing and dominion of God's creation. In this context, "work" refers to the activities humans engage in for most of their lives employment meaning profits can be conceptualized from both the economic and religious perspectives. From the economic viewpoint, profits indicate the ability of the businesses to achieve efficiency in meeting customer and employee goals, as these are the key stakeholders of any organizational entity that trigger economic activities. It can be asserted that profits act as proper metrics of how successful an enterprise actively augments both customers and employees' lives. For example, according to the economic theory of capitalism, the state operates as a business entity contrary to the religious character that attributes profits to employment value. While capitalism is seen as a system built upon theft and degeneration of the environment, it also revolutionized the states' resilience in creating employment, thus an improvement on employees' lives. It can also be noted that capitalism approached, albeit an extrinsic method to mitigate inequality, increased the workers' concentration and made their economic operation difficult due to centralized property control (Mugny & Romero, 2023). In this vein, profits can be seen as an arbiter to balance customer and employee dominance or oppression as an indicator of the organization's ability to create value for all stakeholders.

The kingdom of heaven parable in Matthew points to how the followers of Jesus had abandoned the concept of organizational profitability, losing trust and zeal in subduing God's creation and ultimately losing the meaning of life based on good, faithful, and productive business. In conclusion, it can be noted that profits are a critical indicator of the organization's ability to optimize resources and mitigate stakeholder exploitation risk. Similarly, losses, from an economic perspective, represent the organizations' incapacity to deliver and offer optimal services to its customers' needs or, ultimately, the employees' living standards. However, a contingent variation may happen from a biblical perspective as profit helps humanity to demonstrate their skills in creating the economically anticipated business. In a biblical context, the ability of the organization to achieve profits helps in subduing God's creation leading humanity to achieve their purpose in his creation.

References

Mugny, F., & Romero, A. (2023). The myth of intrinsic motivation and the religious attitude towards profits. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1132580